The Prerequisite for Peace

August 2024—Last month’s issue laid out the threats from abroad confronting the Free World and the challenges we face at home in addressing those threats. In this issue, we look at how the lessons of Cold War I provide guidance for these early chapters of Cold War II.

Deterrence or Danger?
“Circumstances during the first half of the 20th century had provided physical strength and political authority to dictatorships,” historian John Lewis Gaddis explains. “Why should the second half have been different?” The answer: “a striking shift in the attitude of the United States” from focusing inward to “planning a postwar world in which democracy and capitalism would be secure.”

Crucially, this effort was bipartisan and enduring: At the beginning of Cold War I, President Harry Truman declared, “It must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.” In the closing chapters of Cold War I, President Ronald Reagan argued, “Support for freedom fighters is self-defense” and “is tied to our own security.”

As they aided those willing to fight for their own freedom, Truman, Reagan, and every president they bookended made investments in deterrent military strength: Truman spoke of “the burden of creating and maintaining armed forces sufficient to deter aggression.” Reagan steered Cold War I to a peaceful end by noting, “None of the four wars in my lifetime came about because we were too strong…Our military strength is a prerequisite for peace.”

Cold War-era presidents understood that deterring war is far less costly than waging war, that investing in defense is never a waste and that shortchanging defense never ends well.

For instance, in the eight years before entering World War I, the U.S. devoted an average of 0.7 percent of GDP to defense. During the war, the U.S. spent an average of 16.1 percent of GDP on defense—and sacrificed 116,516 military personnel.

In the decade before entering World War II, the U.S. spent an average of 1.1 percent of GDP on defense. During the war, the U.S. spent an average of 27 percent of GDP on defense—and sacrificed 405,399 military personnel.

During Cold War I, by contrast, Americans invested an average of 7 percent of GDP on defense. Those investments didn’t end all wars, but they did deter Moscow and prevent World War III.

Regrettably, for the past 13 years, America has invested just over 3 percent of GDP in defense. As a consequence, the Army is trying to deter war in Europe with one-third the soldiers it deployed during the Cold War. Navy leaders report that they need 500+ ships; they have 296. The average age of America’s B-52 bombers is over 60. With only 19 stealth bombers in service, less than 14 percent of the current bomber fleet would be able to penetrate Russia’s or China’s air defenses. The Biden administration’s 2024 and 2025 defense budget proposals didn’t keep pace with inflation.

Building a military capable of deterring aggression may carry greater costs up front, but it's far less dangerous than offering our enemies what Churchill called “temptations to a trial of strength”—and ultimately far less costly in treasure and blood than scrambling to respond to aggression, rescue fallen countries or recover lost freedoms. Two thousand years of history illustrate that peace through strength works.

Sen. Roger Wicker recently unveiled a sober plan to revive peace through strength and shift back to a Cold War defense posture. But putting that plan into action will demand bipartisan cooperation, fiscal discipline and hard choices. Fueled by torrents of domestic spending over the past 20 years, the annual deficit tops $1 trillion, and the national debt is $32 trillion. Defense spending is not to blame for these fiscal challenges. In fact, we could eliminate the entire defense budget, and we would still face a budget deficit—and wouldn’t even put a dent into the debt.

Some will argue that investing more in deterrence is costly. They’re right. But there’s something far more costly than deterring war: waging war.

Good News
There is some good news amidst all the worrisome news.

First, the Free World is bigger than it was during Cold War I, which means the Free World has more to contribute to the common defense.

NATO—the greatest alliance of free nations in history—today comprises 32 nations, 967 million people and 55 percent of global defense spending. If we add Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Australia, Argentina, Israel and India to that tally, the Free World enfolds 2.76 billion people, 66 percent of global defense spending and what former Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Michael Mullen calls “a thousand-ship navy.” Nineteen of the 20 largest tech companies are headquartered in the Free World. Geologists recently discovered the world’s largest lithium deposits in California, Oregon and Nevada. The U.S. alone possesses more oil than OPEC’s combined reserves.

The American people have made it clear that there’s no longer any room in the Free World for free-riders. The Free World has gotten the message, which highlights a second piece of good news: Our allies are stepping up.

European nations have sent more aid to Ukraine than the U.S. Britain is deploying 20,000 troops to defend NATO’s northern flank. Poland—the new center of gravity in Europe—is devoting 4 percent of GDP to the common defense. Italy has dispatched a carrier strike group to the South China Sea for exercises with Australia and the Philippines. Germany is standing up a permanent base for 5,000 frontline combat troops in Lithuania, nearly doubling defense spending and deploying warplanes to Japan for joint training.

Speaking of Japan, Tokyo will soon boast the world’s third-largest defense budget.

South Korea’s defense budget has jumped 37 percent in recent years, Australia’s 47 percent. Australia is training Ukrainian troops and sending anti-armor systems, howitzers, ammunition, armored vehicles and UAVs to Ukraine. South Korea is shipping artillery shells to Ukraine via the U.S.

British, Italian and French warships have joined a U.S. armada in the Mediterranean and Red Seas to defend Israel’s flanks. France and Britain helped the U.S. shield Israel from Iranian missile attacks. Even as it defends its frontiers against terror, Israel is attritting Iran’s presence in Syria, sharing missile-defense systems with Germany and Finland, and sending missile-warning systems to Ukraine.

The Philippines is opening nine bases to U.S. assets, working with Washington and Tokyo to modernize its military, and reorienting its army from counterterrorism to deterrence.

India has increased defense spending by 49 percent the past decade, commissioned its second aircraft carrier, and opened its ports and airfields to U.S. assets.

A third piece of good news: The Free World is rebuilding its industrial capacity.

The Pentagon is finalizing a new “national defense industrial strategy” and recently began building a constellation of regional microchip-manufacturing hubs. The Navy is mulling partnerships with Japan, South Korea, Singapore and the Philippines to speed repair of U.S. warships. The U.S. is exploring shipbuilding partnerships with South Korea and Japan. Allied nations are collaborating on joint weapons production. NATO members are streamlining purchasing cooperation and mitigating supply-chain constraints. Some European arms manufacturers are merging to boost production.

The investments and adjustments are starting to pay dividends: U.S. industry is increasing artillery shell production from 14,000 a month in 2022 to 70,000 per month by 2025—and 85,000 per month by 2028. U.S. production of guided rocket-launch systems will more than double next year. The Pentagon’s new Replicator program is accelerating the production of unmanned-attack systems, churning out 1,000 Switchblade drones over the next six months and fielding thousands more uncrewed systems after 2025. Germany has quadrupled tank-shell production to 240,000 rounds per year. Sweden is quadrupling production of anti-tank systems. Europe’s largest munitions producer will pump out 600,000 shells this year, up from 150,000 in 2022. NATO is investing $1.2 billion to help allies replenish their 155mm artillery stocks. A coalition of NATO nations is supplying Ukraine with a million attack drones.

Question Marks
In short, the roadmap, the capabilities and the resources for the Free World to wage and win Cold War II are all there. What remains to be seen is if the Free World has the will to leverage its advantages, as it did in Cold War I.