Jonathan Caverly and Ethan Kapstein maintained that the United States’ domination of the global arms market is disappearing and that as a consequence, Washington is squandering an array of economic and political benefits. Critics dispute the point; Caverley and Kapstein respond.
Defense budget cuts won't make the United States less secure. The problem is simpler: the Pentagon does not have a resource problem, it has an administrative problem.
Did the Bush administration disregard military expertise before the Iraq war? Should military leaders have done more to protest in response?
The U.S. military needs more manpower, badly. And this means reordering budgets, putting troops over technology. Or does it?
The battlefield victory in Iraq obscured what the occupation has since made clear: the U.S. military's personnel system--especially the size of its active-duty Army and the number of crucial units kept in the reserves--desperately needs updating.
President Clinton and the Republican Congress do not agree on much, but both want to give the Pentagon more than it dared hope for in the post--Cold War era: some $260 billion a year. The Joint Chiefs say the United States should be ready to fight two wars at once, but would this really take as many troops as they claim, and is it even reasonable to plan for it? Look around at what allies and enemies are spending. Election time, however, is almost here, and politics in the defense debate has seldom run higher. What makes no strategic sense is good on the hustings.