Sen. Wicker: Money alone won’t fix our military

by Harlan Ullman, opinion contributor - 06/03/24 1:30 PM ET

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) has sounded the general quarters alarm about the dangerous state of the U.S. military.  

In a New York Times op-ed last week, Wicker declared “America’s Military is Not Prepared for War — or Peace.” In a longer document, Wicker has rolled out his plan called “21st Century Peace Through Strength: A Generational Investment in the U.S. Military” to reverse what he sees as a crisis in defense.

But is Wicker correct? Is the U.S. military as unprepared as Wicker alleges? And is spending more money the solution? 

After all, if history is a guide, over the past decade and despite increases in defense spending, the size of the active-duty military has declined. How then is the spiral of spending more and getting less going to be reversed?

The Wicker plan would add $55 billion to the 2025 defense budget and grow annual defense spending to 5 percent of GDP during the next five to seven years. The Navy would expand to 357 ships over the next decade and the Air Force would add another 340 aircraft by decade’s end. The plan specifies 19 key areas for more defense spending. 

An examination of the Wicker Plan shows three crucial components are missing in action.  

First, there is no overarching military strategy provided as the foundation for this buildup. Second, no evidence has been presented to show that this larger force is affordable, would be more effective than the current force or would reverse this spending/force size mismatch. Third, given the failure to man the current force, the report is silent on how sufficient people can be recruited and retained in this larger military.

By default, Wicker must assume that the current National Defense Strategy remains in place. That strategy aims to compete and deter, and if war arises, to defeat or prevail over enemies headed by China and Russia. 

But how to compete is not defined. And if the aim is to deter, where have China or Russia (or the Houthis and Hamas) been deterred? Also, as the main powers have admitted, thermonuclear war cannot be fought and cannot be won.

As for affordability, the Wicker Plan does not mention the effects of uncontrolled annual real cost growth for every item defense requires, from people to precision weapons to pencils, of 5-7 percent. Add 3-5 percent for inflation. With an annual defense budget of $900 billion, another $70-100 billion is needed just to stay even. Wicker’s request is for about half that and will not sustain the current force.

Further, with growing annual deficits and a $35 billion debt, from where is the extra money for defense coming if spending is to reach 5 percent of GDP or $1.3-5 trillion? The answer is nowhere.