Reference News Network, December 12 report: The U.S. "National Interest" bi-monthly website published an article titled "The Pentagon Is Fighting Bureaucracy with More Bureaucracy" on December 9, authored by Brandon Weichert. The summary of the article is as follows:

The Trump administration's decision to establish a new key large-scale weapons system project director is not a wise move, even if it was well-intentioned, as it aims to streamline the Pentagon.

According to the "Defense One" website, due to the deep-rooted problems in the U.S. Air Force, the Pentagon is setting up a new office, whose head will report directly to the Deputy Secretary of Defense, specifically tasked with addressing these issues.

General Dale White will serve as the "Direct Reporting Project Director for Key Large-Scale Weapons Systems," responsible for projects including the new intercontinental ballistic missile, the B-21 stealth bomber, the F-47 fighter, and Air Force One. The reason is that the Air Force has performed poorly in equipment procurement and R&D projects, making it necessary to create a new path to develop reliable and cost-controlled weapons systems.

The Pentagon's equipment procurement process is a major problem, both for military readiness and for American taxpayers. Long procurement cycles, budget overruns, bureaucratic chaos, and numerous misplaced incentives have collectively caused the U.S. defense system, which costs nearly $1 trillion annually, to fail to perform its intended role.

The current U.S. defense system is a product of the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act. This law was a necessary measure taken by Congress to address the already inefficient defense system at the time, but the system established by the reform is no longer suitable for the current international environment. The U.S. needs a new model, and only through legislation can such a transformation be achieved.

However, relevant legislation has been delayed. Distorted incentive mechanisms have fostered corruption between U.S. defense contractors and members of Congress.

Defense contractors often tend to sell extremely complex and expensive weapon systems to the military. Once any problems arise with a project, they can continue to extract more funds from taxpayers by fixing the faults — in short, they are unable to deliver usable and affordable equipment on time, while also taking advantage of the situation to siphon off money.

Congress has stood by, because most major defense contractors have built a "revolving door" mechanism between the defense industry and Congress: politicians who worked for defense contractors during their tenure are rewarded with high-paying jobs in the defense sector after leaving office. These politicians continue to receive substantial campaign donations from the industry as long as they keep working for the defense industry.

Even if the Trump administration establishes a special office to push forward key projects and avoid these projects becoming victims of the inefficiency of the defense equipment procurement process, it still cannot solve the above problems.

Instead of streamlining existing bureaucratic institutions and improving the Air Force's equipment procurement process, creating a new bureaucratic path to bypass the existing large bureaucratic system is unhelpful.

This approach may help advance the development of intercontinental ballistic missiles or the B-21 " Raider" bomber project, but it has little effect on solving the systemic problems within the Pentagon.

In an article published in 2024, scholar John Ferrari of the American Enterprise Institute highlighted the drawbacks of solving equipment procurement problems by establishing new positions. Ferrari stated in the article: "People will eventually realize that rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic cannot prevent the ship from hitting an iceberg." His three solutions are far superior to any remedial measures taken by the Trump administration:

1. Return the authority to procure equipment to the military leadership;

2. Abandon the outdated "planning, programming, budgeting, and execution" process, and replace it with what Ferrari calls a "defense resource allocation system," transforming the rigid annual budget model into a continuous strategic planning model;

3. Terminate all joint weapon programs among the different branches of the military.

Worse still, this new position in the Air Force was established through an executive order, not by Congress, highlighting the severe disorder in the U.S. defense system, which is overspending. The system clearly cannot deliver usable weapons at reasonable costs, and thus is not prepared to fight a 21st-century war.

It is understandable that the Trump administration is determined to eliminate red tape at all costs. But creating a new small centralized bureaucratic institution within a larger bureaucratic system does not improve the U.S. military readiness and combat capabilities. If this new office survives the remainder of Trump's term (which is unlikely), it would only create a whole set of new problems for the Pentagon. Congress must pass legislation to comprehensively reform itself and the Department of Defense. (Translated by Qing Songzhu)

Original source: toutiao.com/article/7582860279051059775/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.