Follow us on social

google cta
Welcome to the defense death spiral

Welcome to the defense death spiral

At the current spending rate, in another generation we will have a lot of rich contractors and no aircraft or Naval fleets to speak of


Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

A basic truth in Washington is that almost every single new weapon system ends up costing significantly more than the one it is replacing.

As the cost of weapons increases, the number of systems produced decreases. That’s how the United States ended up with only 21 B-2s, 187 F-22s, and three Zumwalt-class destroyers, rather than the 132, 750, and 32 respectively the military initially promised. This phenomenon creates what is known as the Defense Death Spiral, when the unit cost of new weapons outrace defense budgets.

John Boyd and his friends in the Military Reform Movement during the late Cold War years warned us about the military industrial congressional complex 50 years ago. This small band of Pentagon insiders saw with their own eyes how the political economy created by the financial and political connections between the military elite, the defense industry, and society’s ruling class wasted precious resources and produced a series of deeply flawed weapons.

President Eisenhower elegantly articulated the dangers of the military industrial congressional complex in 1961, several years before Colonel Boyd and his friends began their work. He warned that only “an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.” This statement remains as true today as it was on that wintery January day 53 years ago.

With all due respect to President Eisenhower, it must be acknowledged that he issued his warning during the final days of his presidency rather than at its beginning – when he could have used his office to do something about it. The participants of the Military Reform Movement sacrificed their traditional careers and the greater financial rewards they could have enjoyed to actively fix the system from within.

President Eisenhower defined the problem for Boyd and his friends. They dissected it, identified the underlying pathologies of the system, and then did all they could to affect meaningful change.

The Death Spiral is one of the main Pentagon Pathologies. The American people devote ever greater resources to their defense while receiving less and less in return. The Air Force had 10,387 aircraft in 1975 when the Military Reformers began their work in earnest. Today the Air Force has 5,288. The Navy had 559 active ships in 1975. Today the fleet has only 296. The Pentagon’s base budget is more than 60% higher today than it was in 1975, when adjusted for inflation. The American people simply spend more and receive much less in return for their defense dollars.

An argument can be made that modern military equipment is more expensive because of the capabilities they provide the troops. That is extremely debatable because many of the high-profile acquisition programs over the past 25 years have been underwhelming at best, and often complete failures. It is difficult to find anyone who will honestly say the Littoral Combat Ship was worth the effort.

Left unchecked, the acquisition Death Spiral’s inevitable destination is unilateral disarmament. Norman Augustine, a former DoD official and Lockheed Martin CEO predicted in 1983, with only a hint of satire, that by 2054, “the entire defense budget will purchase just one aircraft. This aircraft will have to be shared by the Air Force and Navy 3-1/2 days each per week except for leap year, when it will be made available to the Marines for the extra day.”

The right way to combat an inevitable fate similar to Augustine’s prediction would be to stop business as usual in defense procurement. Service leaders should abandon the practice of pursuing the most technologically advanced weapons possible. Rather than trying to add every conceivable gadget to each airplane, ship, and ground vehicle, the military should simplify designs. A quality weapon is one that is just capable enough to perform the intended task.

The Pentagon should only approve programs for development when the component technologies have already been proven effective. That is how the Pentagon can avoid another acquisition debacle like that of the F-35, for which development work continues 23 years after Lockheed Martin won the contract.

Lawmakers and defense officials constantly say the acquisition system needs to be updated to speed weapons to the warfighters at the “speed of relevance.” That is a worthy goal, but it doesn’t require new laws and regulations to achieve. The only thing required is a more realistic design approach.

Unsurprisingly to many people, realism is not the approach of the national security establishment. The establishment’s leaders want to combat the Death Spiral by throwing more money at the problem. Senator Roger Wicker wants to drastically increase defense spending to 5% of GDP. Such an increase would add an additional $5 trillion in Pentagon spending over the next ten years over the already eye-watering $9.3 trillion currently projected over the same period.

Something clearly must give. The United States needs an effective military force to defend its interests. But if the country is bankrupted in the pursuit, then what is the ultimate point? The good news is that the solution to the Death Spiral conundrum doesn’t require additional legislation and will save countless billions of taxpayer dollars. All that is really required is true leadership to instill the necessary discipline to the process.

Finding the right leaders is the only real challenge to be faced.


Top photo credit: Wonder AI
google cta
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
Polymarket Iran War
Top photo credit: Polymarket logo (Shutterstock/PJ McDonald) and Scene following an airstrike on an Iranian police centre damaging residential buildings around it in Niloofar square in central Tehran on march 1, 2026. (Hamid Vakili/Parspix/ABACAPRESS.COM)

Prediction markets are a national security threat

Latest

Hours before an Israeli attack in Tehran killed Ayatollah Khamenei, an account on the prediction market Polymarket made over half a million dollars wagering that Iran’s Supreme Leader would vacate office before 3/31. That account, named “Magamyman,” was not the only one to cash in on the attacks.

Half a dozen Polymarket accounts made over $1.2M betting that the U.S. “strikes Iran by February 28, 2026.” Those accounts were allegedly paid for through cryptocurrency wallets that had previously not been funded prior to Feb. 27. Overall, prediction market users bet over $255M on markets related to the attacks in Iran on the prediction markets Kalshi and Polymarket alone.

keep readingShow less
Indonesia stock exchange
Top photo credit: (Shutterstock/Triawanda Tirta Aditya)

Trump's ‘move fast and break things’ war slams into economy

Middle East

The launch of joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran could lead to economic and financial disruptions that ripple across the countries of the Global South with devastating effects. And while a quick end to the war could dampen these effects, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has acknowledged that the war could even last up to 8 weeks, and Israel is now reportedly expecting a "weeks-long" war with Iran.

The fundamental issue here seems to be an increasingly expansive vision of American — and particularly Israeli — war aims. These have now gone well beyond Iran’s offer of substantial denuclearization to regime change, and some quarters have even more extreme visions like the potential Balkanization of Iran into multiple statelets. Such mission creep on the part of the U.S. and Israel has in turn changed incentive structures in Iran towards an expansion of the conflict to target both the Gulf States and global oil markets, a dynamic that threatens to broaden the conflict and extend it, with profound impacts on the global economy.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.