Defense
The rhetoric on pending cuts to the Pentagon intensified this week, but the chances of a pre-election deal to avert those spending reductions and others appear unlikely. – DEFCON Hill
In a surprise move, 89 Republicans joined 158 Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives to vote in favor of reducing the Pentagon’s budget by $1.1 billion for 2013. The vote was held during debate of the defense appropriations bill, which the House passed July 19. – Defense News
As the rhetoric on Capitol Hill continues to rage over the pending automatic U.S. budget cuts known as sequestration, senior defense executives and industry representatives are forming into two camps. The first camp has no shortage of dire predictions over the devastation to the nation’s industrial base if the cuts take effect next January. A second, less visible group is quietly wondering if the fire and brimstone might be excessive — and even damaging — to the cause. – Defense News
FPI Director Eric Edelman and Dov Zakheim write: A shrunken defense budget, for which the “pivot” is nothing more than a fig leaf, undercuts other aspects of the administration’s foreign policy. A strong military engenders equally strong alliances, and bolsters the force of our diplomacy. There is much symbolism, and more than a little irony, in the fact that we are pointing our military power toward the setting sun. This irony should not be lost on the American people. It clearly will not be lost on our enemies. – Politico
Reps. Tom Price (R-GA) and Vicky Hertzler (R-MO) write: It’s time to put aside partisan politics and work together for future generations of Americans. Our families deserve peace and security. Our troops deserve to be fully prepared and fully funded. Our veterans deserve our respect and care. That does not mean sequestration. It means fulfilling our constitutional responsibility by providing for the common defense. – Politico
Michael O’Hanlon writes: The CBO is issuing a clarion call — it is time to get real about how to match military ends with means. Deeper budget cuts will have to wait. We are going to have to eliminate additional programs and forces just to accomplish the savings goals now on the books. – Politico
Pete Hegseth writes: As members of Congress spar over our nation’s defense spending priorities, I urge them to remember that while it might seem politically expedient to cut indiscriminately, it won’t serve our nation’s national security interests. We desperately need courageous politicians who will cut through the political dysfunction that is “sequestration” and stand up for targeted spending cuts that protect our national security and defense priorities. – AOL Defense
Cybersecurity
Michael Chertoff writes: We need a cyber strategy that creates legal rules to sanction both commercial and more-nefarious efforts to hijack control over our information-technology systems and devices. – Wall Street Journal (subscription required)
Missile Defense
Gregory Keeley writes: MEADS should not yet be written off. Notwithstanding a bleak defense spending climate, Congress should stand by U.S. international defense obligations. The budget for both continuation and termination is fundamentally zero sum — there is no downside to complete this next-generation defense project. Failure to do so will sully the nation’s international reputation and diminish its threat preparedness and that of key NATO allies – Defense News
