None
EN
‘National Defense Strategy’: A Novel and Unlikely, but Welcome, Proposition
['Thomas Knapp', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Avatar', 'Where Img', 'Height Auto Max-Width', 'Vertical-Align Bottom .Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow .Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Avatar', 'Vertical-Align Middle .Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Avatar Is .Alignleft .Alignright']
Antiwar.com
“Military leaders have raised serious concerns about the Trump administration’s forthcoming defense strategy,” the Washington Post reports.
Fact #1: Any “national defense strategy” that’s actually about national defense would indeed involve “centering the Pentagon on perceived threats to the homeland, narrowing U.S. competition with China, and downplaying America’s role in Europe and Africa.”Fact #2: In a time of massive government deficits and debt, re-centering “national defense strategy” on, you know, “national defense” instead of constant, dangerous, and expensive military adventurism around the globe makes financial sense.
Current US “defense” spending officially hovers at just below, and likely actually exceeds, $1 trillion per year.
We almost certainly won’t see the cuts in military spending or the reductions in foreign adventurism the description implies.
But meanwhile, we should welcome even the slightest reorientation of US military policy toward “national defense” rather than foreign meddling.