WASHINGTON, DC – National Defense recently analyzed President Trump’s proposed military buildup, noting which elements of the Army will benefit from the budget increase. The article highlighted that as a result of President Trump’s wish to grow the force by 90,000 troops, funding for the development of next-generation systems will suffer.
There is no money to invest in long-range projects… The president wants to grow the force by 90,000 troops. That eats up a lot of operational and equipment funding.” — Hamilton Cook
Speaking with Avascent Managing Director Jim Tinsley and Senior Market Analyst Hamilton Cook, National Defense noted analysts and military officials caution that the next generation of weapon systems will be pushed further of into the future. Hamilton Cook noted that the question of whether a bigger but less technologically advanced force is preferable to a smaller one supported by sophisticated cutting-edge systems has been a “battle for the soul of the Army,” adding that “the Army needs headroom to invest in next generation technology and in a younger force with more modern platforms. The increase of force size directed by Trump is politically popular and expedient, but the Army could be penalized by eliminating the flexibility to invest.”
Managing Director Jim Tinsley spoke to the effect of the budget increase on ground systems, noting that the increase is good news for the defense industrial base and manufacturing jobs in the Midwest where previously, facilities like the Army’s tank assembly plant in Lima, Ohio was in danger of being closed. Tinsley further argued that it is not a binary decision to increase personnel or modernize systems, as the Army would have options to modernize the fleet if it moved to acquire weapon systems developed by other countries. Historically not a popular choice as the Army has been reluctant to adopt someone else’s “slightly more advanced vehicle, and instead has pursued ‘game changing vehicle technology’ to drive us into a new future that no other country can afford,” Tinsley added, however, noting that opinions are shifting as caution from failed development programs mounts.
Click here to read the full article: “Despite Budget Boost, Army Investments in Future Weapons Stuck in Idle.”