President Trump’s FY 2018 defense budget promises a “historic” defense buildup. At $603 billion in the base national defense budget, some $54 billion over the Budget Control Act caps, it grows the size of military slightly and boosts RDT&E efforts, but doesn’t move the needle on procurement. Does the FY 2018 budget request build the military the U.S. needs? Will Congress succeed in funding more for defense?
"Nobody does defense policy better than CSBA. Their work on strategic and budgetary topics manages to combine first-rate quality and in-depth research with timeliness and accessibility—which is why so many professionals consider their products indispensable." – Gideon Rose, Editor, Foreign Affairs.
The United States has a long history of engaging in irregular wars and countering insurgencies, one that predates its independence. To understand what worked, what did not, and why, this study assesses the measures, both coercive and benign, that the United States has used in a limited number of pivotal cases to determine if U.S. irregular warfare and counterinsurgency (COIN) approaches have changed significantly over the past two centuries. It also makes recommendations for the future.
Statement Before the Senate and Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Seapower Options and Considerations for Achieving a 355-ship Navy
“Chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Seapower, Senator Roger Wicker and Ranking Member, Senator Mazie Hirono hosted a hearing to explore options and considerations for achieving a 355-ship Navy. CSBA Senior Fellow Bryan Clark was invited to give testimony.”
U.S. foreign policy is likely to be wracked by crises in the coming years. Yet crises are often symptoms of deeper structural transformations, and the fundamental fact of international politics today is that the post-Cold War era has reached its end. That period was defined by uncontested U.S. and Western primacy, a marked decline in ideological struggle and great-power conflict, and a historically remarkable degree of global cooperation in addressing international disorder. Today, however, the international system has reverted to a more contested state. The core characteristics of the emerging era are the gradual but unmistakable erosion of U.S. and Western primacy, the return of sharp great-power competition across all three key regions of Eurasia, the revival of global ideological struggle, and the empowerment of the agents of international strife and disorder. Moreover, the impact of these forces is magnified by growing uncertainty about whether the traditional defenders of the post-Cold War system will be able and willing to play that role in the future. Dealing with the dangers and dilemmas posed by the new global politics will be a generational task. Yet understanding the basic nature of the age is the critical first step.
House Armed Services Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces Chairman Wittman and Ranking Member Courtney host a hearing to explore the challenges and opportunities of Amphibious Warfare in a Contested Environment.
Dealing With Allies in Decline: Alliance Management and U.S. Strategy in an Era of Global Power Shifts
Dealing with Allies in Decline: Alliance Management and U.S. Strategy in an Era of Global Power Shifts is the latest study by CSBA Senior Fellow Hal Brands. In the monograph, Brands argues that although America's alliances are a source of great geopolitical strength, the difficult reality is that shifts in global economic and military power have left many of America's traditional allies with significantly diminished relative standing and capabilities.