|
|
|
|
|
August 14, 1998 MEMORANDUM
TO: OPINION LEADERS FROM:
GARY SCHMITT SUBJECT: Defense Yesterday's Washington
Post carried a front-page story ("Military Readiness, Morale Show
Strain: Budgets Contract; Deployments Expand") by reporters Bradley
Graham and Eric Pianin on the erosion in America's military strength.
On Sunday, the Post had published a piece ("America's Military, Cut
to the Quick") by Brookings analyst Michael O'Hanlon on why planned
levels of defense spending are insufficient to modernize the U.S. military,
train and retain skilled personnel, and meet the nation’s global
commitments in the future. The good news in these
two pieces is that the problem of inadequate defense budgets is increasingly
recognized by the Washington establishment. The bad news, of course, is
that nothing is being done to correct it. Efforts by Senate Majority Leader
Trent Lott, House Speaker Newt Gingrich and others to raise the issue
with the Clinton Administration have gotten nowhere -- and the Hill has
been unwilling to step up to the plate alone. Since 1996, we have
argued that planned defense budgets could not sustain a position of American
leadership in the world.* Fourteen years of defense cuts have created
a widening gap between U.S. national security strategy and the forces
needed to carry it out. Combined with the inept foreign policies of this
administration, the drawdown on America's military power has both our
adversaries and our allies starting to question our willingness and capacity
to handle our global responsibilities. * See, e.g., William
Kristol and Robert Kagan, “Toward a Neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy,”
Foreign Affairs (July/August 1996); the Project's founding "Statement
of Foreign Policy Principles," (June 3, 1997); Gary Schmitt, "The
Case for Spending More on Defense," Washington Times (January 7,
1998); and Robert Kagan and Gary Schmitt, “Now May We Please Defend
Ourselves?” Commentary (July 1998).
|
 |
   
|
