US advised to buy more B-21s amid a escalating budget deficit

The bulgarianmilitary.com website says the US Congress Strategic Posture Commission urges Washington to revamp nuclear and conventional forces in light of a potential adversarial alignment between China and Russia. Caliber.Az republishes the article.

Unveiled on October 12, the final report from the U.S. Congress Strategic Posture Commission has issued a clarion call for Washington. Its focus is to prescribe an urgent and comprehensive revamp of U.S. nuclear and conventional forces. The revision is seen as crucial in light of a potential adversarial alignment between China and Russia. 

According to the report, “The United States, fortifying its bond with allies, should be prepared not only to deter but also triumph over multiple adversaries in unison… The globally recognized norms and principles steered by the U.S. are under an imminent threat from the authoritative rule of China and Russia.”

An executive involved in the report explained some details to Reuters. “There is no concrete evidence suggesting that Russia and China are tailoring their efforts towards a dual nuclear war. But we fret over a possible ultimate coordination between them. This is a construes a dual-war scenario.” 

Escalating danger

The commission’s argument highlighted the escalating danger posed by the combined powers of China and Russia, anticipated to peak in the year 2027. Consequently, they emphasized that “decisions ought to be taken at present to equip the country aptly for such circumstances.”

The report underscored the expanded acquisition of B-21 intercontinental range stealth bombers. The expanded acquisition Columbia Class submarines is also include in the report. The submarine is a key components to fortify national security, the report said. 

Anticipations are high regarding the two new assets, which by 2030, are poised to bring transformative changes to the maritime and aeronautical divisions of the American nuclear triad. This innovation holds the potential to rewrite strategic power dynamics.

However, the feasibility of a considerable increment in American defense expenditure is under intense scrutiny. This skepticism stems from the unprecedented and escalating budget deficits. With the United States government debts creeping into tens of trillions of dollars, the burden of interest payments is swelling at an alarming rate. Projections indicate that by 2027, these payments are likely to outpace the Pentagon’s budget.

In their assessment of the commission’s recommendations, the Federation of American Scientists stated that virtually no attention was given to the discussion of cost in the entire report. They pointed out the seemingly unbounded approach to defense spending, a perspective that appears not to acknowledge fiscal limitations.

The group also suggested that the commission refrain from advocating for an immediate expansion of the American nuclear arsenal, primarily because the existing weaponry production complex lacks the necessary capacity. 

Even though the United States, as of today, outspends the combined defense budgets of numerous other nations, its expenditure on arms acquisitions has significantly trailed China’s since approximately 2020. Notably, a vast majority of America’s armed forces spending goes towards salaries, benefits for veterans, as well as other personnel-related expenses.

Increasing concerns have been voiced about the condition of America’s nuclear forces. A steep contraction of the bomber fleet is identified as one of the major issues, especially concerning the B-1B bomber. This aircraft has been marred by some of the poorest availability rates within the fleet. 

Time delay

In another development, the nation’s standalone stealth bomber squadron was forced into an extended hiatus due to severe accidents interrupting its services.

The situation with the ground-based nuclear forces adds to this predicament. Possessing the Minuteman III intercontinental range ballistic missiles in its arsenal, America holds the record for having the most aged missile system in the world, approaching half a century since being commissioned into service. 

Discussing the potential to retire these missiles without a successor is becoming more prevalent, mainly due to the astronomical expenses associated with creating and manufacturing a feasible replacement. The continuous life extension given to the airframes and engines is progressively losing its practicality.