A Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessment (CSBA) study released Aug. 4 disputes the widely circulated theory that modernization of the strategic nuclear triad, including replacing the Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines and their sea-launched intercontinental missiles, is “unaffordable.”
The study, by CSBA’s well-regarded analyst Todd Harrison, concludes that in the peak years the annual cost of the planned modernization of the Navy’s sea-based leg of the triad, the Air Force’s airborne and land-based legs and the nuclear warheads used on them would amount to less than 5 percent of the total defense budget.
Five percent of the total expected budget “is not unaffordable,” Harrison told reporters at a briefing.
“Is it going to be a challenge? Absolutely! But it’s not a matter of affordability, it’s a matter of prioritization,” he said.