What shapes American Defense policy
American Defense policy is defined by our nationalistic assertive pragmatism. The ideology derived from the what many call the “ Manifest Destiny” a term that is coined by Jacksonian Democrats in the mid 19th Century to justify the aggressive polices. As stated in Unit 1 of this coarse American Foreign Policy establishes that the themes of American defense policy where a consistent through the mid –nineteenth century This assertively pragmatic approach is made clear on pg. 99 of American Foreign Policy when Lentlesion is quoted as saying ” for the most part the United States has played the role of regional hegemon. This role goes back the Monroe Doctrine’s warning to European powers no to seek to recolonize or any other way extend their system to any position in this hemisphere.” The by Neo conservatives who subscribe to the Barry Goldwater conservative foreign policy of the Richard Nixon and Regan Administration and has been the focal point of “Shining City on the Hill “ speech that has been the rallying cry of Modern conservatives.
Current Mission Defined
The current mission is defined by multipolar powers tugging at the heart strings of the developing world, policymakers want the U.S. military to contain China while courting India ; transform failed states such as Lybia and the Sudan into stable Jeffersonian democracies; engage terrorists where ever they might take root as well outsourcing the foreign militaries to chase terrorists; protect sea lanes; keep oil cheap; democratize the Middle East; protect European, Asian, and Middle Eastern states from aggression; spread good will through humanitarian missions; respond to natural disasters at home and abroad; secure cyberspace, and much more. For the supporters of such missions, the military forces and budget needed to pursue these goals can never be enough. So we must redefine and reengaging our countries most urgent priorities. Arguments about defense spending are arguments about defense strategy. What you spend depends on what you want to do militarily, which depends in turn on theories about what creates security.
One easily that due to U.S dominance in conventional warfare has given non state adversaries (terrorist) and there state sponsors (rogue nations) the necessity to adopt asymmetric techniques to counter or neutralize our advantages. For this the DOD has decided to implement irregular warfare techniques that augment conventional combat methods. U.S threats also seek to equal the level warfare capability by developing or obtaining chemical, biological, and especially nuclear weapons as well as cyber techniques that can disrupt US warfare dominance. The 2008 NSS outlines the development and proliferation of anti-access technology and weaponry is worrisome as it can restrict our future freedom of action. These challenges could come not only in the obvious forms we see today but also in less traditional forms of influence such as manipulating global opinion using mass communications venues and exploiting international commitments and legal avenues (2008NSS).
The Current navel and Air Force are among the untouchables with the mission of the “Asian Pivot”. It is essential that we look at “process” rather than budget gauging. the United States must maintain at all time the ability to project ” sustained strength any where int he world and in the current state in mulitpile theaters. Programs such as the F22 and F35 must be overhauled to reflect fiscal realities. the merging of branches is even an option to address budget overlap as mission redundancy.
Current Department of Defense Fiscal Priorities
The Key to the future of an “operational” military is “efficacy “ . There are four main areas that DoD could gain bipartisan support to overhaul the defense budget . The first area is “Acquisitions and Contracts ,which mainly focuses on the contractors who provide services essential to the daily functionality of the DoD. According to a congressional report in in January 2013 the Dod continues to have difficulties challenges securing sufficient competition in contracts; defining contract requirements; obtaining fair and reasonable prices; oversight of contract performance; and maintaining contract documentation this according to the September 7, 2012 report “Acquisition of the Joint Land Attack Cruise Missile Defense Elevated Netted Sensor System,”.
The next area where the Department of Defense can overhaul its fiduciary responsibility is it contract management in the report “Contingency Contracting: A Framework for Reform published on September 18, 2012. A number of contract errors where discovered that signaled to OIG of the DoD that $125 million dollar in tax payer money was lost in 2010 alone in contracting for goods and services to support missions in Asia.
The third area where the Department of Defense has conducted fiscal audits is in the overall financial management. Financial management is another management challenge area where potential monetary benefits and savings can be found. DoD is undertaking significant efforts to develop auditable financial statements by the 2014.
What many budget hawks both on the left and right feel that significant A savings lie near $1 billion dollars a year in the expedition of in which the United States can equipping and training Iraq and Afghan forces to be fully independent and able to defend their perspective sovereign states. For example, in Afghanistan, the United States spends several billion dollars a year to build the Afghan National Security Forces. According to “ Assessment of U.S. Government and Coalition Efforts to Train, Equip and Field the Afghan Air Force,” September 28, 2012 outlined that the US has invested in the long term stability and independence of Iraq and Afghanistan armies. To expunge the burden of the occupying two undeveloped countries can be an unbearable fiscal burden.
Adversaries influence our Defense Strategy and Budget
A Russian foreign policy that is exhibits “assertive pragmatism “ is the result of Russia’s collective insecurity due to the steady and undeterred decline in relevance. Russia is still coming to grips with its diminished position both economically and military. Eastern European analyst lay out in plane form that the expansion of NATO and the marginalization is seen by the Russian Federation Provocative and in some cases even hostile. Lavrov and Deputy Prime Minister and former Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov both explicitly rule out “Cold War” as a label for Russo-American relations, their subordinates are not so soothing.
The Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Aleksandr’ Losyukov, speaking in Tehran, said that” Washington was using Korea and Iran’s proliferation as an issue to consolidate its global strategic position, i.e., invoking those two states to justify its missile defense program. If this issue cannot be resolved by diplomatic means, he warned, Russia will carry out a series of military acts to balance and establish security.” The encroachment of NATO by the addition of Poland Ukraine and even talks with Georgia a country in which Russia has a very hostile border dispute with lends itself to possible conflict. And this could prompt an arms race. This frosty warning, rather than the calculated, insincere, and misleading efforts to invoke Russo- American partnership, more accurately characterizes the present state of Russo-American relations even if they are far from the Cold War. .
Andrei P. Tsygankov writes in his book Russia’s Foreign Policy that Russia and its new hierarchy challenges the current international hierarchy In The Munch 2007 speech Putin establishes that Russia feels that it and other sovereign nations should not be held to the bureaucratic confines of the United Nations when the US and Israel takes unilateral action as it sees fit. The early Cold War US response to Soviet incursion came in the form of President Harry Truman established a tangible US foreign policy philosophy to condition Americans for their new international role by establishing the “Truman Doctrine” in 1947. The United States would defend “free peoples” throughout the world from communist aggression. This policy was implemented in the form of a substantial package of economic and military aid to Greece and Turkey, which were threatened by Soviet expansionist tendencies.. Current US policy should include will have to address Russia as a “realistic global partner in this multipolar international hierarchy
When the policies of China are examined, one can clearly see that he objectives of both states is to further the states position on the world stage. With China it is apparent that they wish to be the world’s largest economy thus there is an overt desire to influence world economic affairs by loaning countries that have currency shortages large sums of cash at low interest rates thus giving them a large sum of debt to hold and use to influence international policies when favorable to China. This is not the goal of any one particular interest with China rather the collective goal of both the Chinese people and the Chinese government.
China has a unified position on subjects such as reunification of Taiwan, Tibet and its role in the South China Sea and well as on issues such as monetary policies and censorship. China’s economic policy was has been coined “The Five Year Plan”. “The Five Year Plan” purpose is to transform the PRC‘s economic and social development model. The plan as laid out by U.S analyst is for the PRC (People Republic of China) to oversee the acceleration and restructuring of the economy towards a free market economy. The People Republic of China and the Russian Federation spend a vast amount of their countries wealth on arms. The People Republic of China has increasingly place much of the wealth gained from its economic explosion into modernizing its military technology. The border issues with India and Regional conflict with its neighbors Japan and Vietnam as well the massive U.S naval presence in the Pacific gives the Chinese great pause. Dr. Harry Kissinger has been noted that he understands the Chinese resentment of American interference in the PRC’s internal issues and affairs. Dr Kissinger states the Chinese are content to remain within their historical realm of influence.
Basic fiscal policy overhauls can and will have sweeping political effects on the United States foreign policy. The ability to project sustained stretch in multiple theaters is quintessential to US dominance and influence . The US saw unparalleled and unmatched influence that propelled it through WWI and then on through the Cold War based simply on the idea that it s ability to produce viable weapons systems efficiently using the private sector and ultimately undermined the Soviet state operated model . It is in this model we see the fiscal efficiency made advancement and maintainment of that advancement possiable.