Reference News Network August 22 report: The U.S. "National Interest" bi-monthly website published an article titled "Why Is It So Difficult to Repair the U.S. Defense Industrial Base?" on August 20, authored by Daniel Bob. The full text is as follows:

The root causes of the crisis in the U.S. defense industrial base are the uncertainty in supply chains and raw materials, as well as a reduction in labor force.

The ability of the United States to defend itself and contain conflicts depends not only on the advancement of its weapon systems but also on the capacity to produce and maintain weapons. For decades, the United States has maintained an absolute advantage in military technology and the industrial strength that supports it. However, this advantage is now weakening—not because of technological stagnation, but due to fragile supply chains, outdated infrastructure, and increasing reliance on foreign key materials and components for supply.

The U.S. defense industrial base is a multi-layered network consisting of manufacturers, foundries, suppliers, and skilled workers, which produces equipment for the U.S. military, and now urgently needs significant improvements. The cost of raw materials continues to rise, many contractors rely on single-source suppliers, and almost all companies are constrained by labor shortages and limited emergency production capacity. These weaknesses have become apparent amid rising global tensions.

From a foreign policy and trade perspective, this trend is concerning. For a long time, national security planning has underestimated the role of economic influence, production capacity, and control over supply chains in shaping geopolitical power. As the boundary between business and conflict continues to blur, industrial resilience must be considered a core element of American strategy.

The U.S. defense production is under obvious pressure. Government assessments and independent analyses have already pointed out serious risks. The industry remains overly dependent on foreign raw materials, a quarter of the workforce in the aerospace and defense industry has reached or exceeded retirement age, the downstream supply chain remains vulnerable, and the loss of a single supplier could cause a complex system's assembly to stall. In addition, the procurement process is based on a "just-in-time logistics" model, which is difficult to withstand geopolitical or economic shocks.

These issues are emerging in multiple areas. In 2024, the backlog of commercial aircraft orders alone exceeded 14,000. Similar bottlenecks have also appeared in missile systems, satellite components, and shipbuilding.

Take the production of military aircraft engines as an example, one of the most advanced and strategically important products produced in the United States. These engines require thousands of precisely manufactured components, including parts made from special alloys and ceramic coatings. Manufacturing tolerances are extremely high, and many of these materials depend on imports or single suppliers.

However, global supply chain issues are increasingly intensifying production pressure. For example, the war in Ukraine disrupted the supply of titanium, which is crucial for aerospace manufacturing, especially engine production. Labor shortages are also becoming more severe, as U.S. factories struggle to find skilled workers to replace retiring technicians, leading to delays in engine production and maintenance. These problems, combined with the current reliance on foreign suppliers for critical components, could result in aircraft being unable to be deployed during a crisis.

The Trump administration re-focused on the risks of relying on adversaries for critical raw materials and advocated bringing manufacturing back as a national priority. This shift began to move the focus of national security discussions toward industrial resilience.

But more targeted actions are still needed. In many areas, particularly in propulsion systems, ammunition, and downstream component manufacturing, there are no backup plans. If a factory shuts down or a key supplier goes bankrupt, the delivery of certain systems will be completely interrupted. For critical components such as the F-135 engine used in the F-35 fighter jet and the propulsion systems of other advanced military aircraft, this means a real crisis.

The U.S. defense industrial base is often seen as playing a logistical support function—important, but outside the core of strategic planning. This perception is no longer applicable. In an unpredictable global environment, the ability to maintain, expand, and adjust military production will determine the upper limit of American power for the next few decades.

Strategic competition with rivals is not just about ships, planes, and missiles, but also about who can produce, resupply, and endure. In this competition, industrial strength is national strength.

The United States still has the capital, technical knowledge, and talent to revitalize its defense manufacturing base, but the time window available to the United States is narrowing. (Translated by Liu Baiyun)

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7541311658438804002/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your opinion by voting up or down below.