China, Ukraine, cybersecurity and a long tail of other issues stress Defense these days. Russia and China launched joint naval drills with Iran in the Gulf of Oman last week, the third naval exercise between the three nations since 2019, and second Russian-Chinese naval exercise in two months.
On 6 March, the South China Morning Post reported China’s intent to grow basic research investment to advance its national security. One does not want to compliment the current Chinese government nor copy it. In the case of basic research, the Chinese military may be copying the United States. In 1946, Public Law 588 directed the U.S. Navy to establish its Office of Naval Research, creating the first standing U.S. basic research defense program and an associated notion of grants to academia to advance relevant knowledge. Fast behind it were Army and Air Force variants. Their records are enviable, for example, GPS, lasers, stealth, ocean acoustics, and scores and scores of investigators whose work won prizes and wars.
The White House is proposing a Defense budget of $842 billion. Some pundits think it will reach $900 billion before the debate ends. Yet, basic research remains the tiniest fraction of the Defense budget.
For the current fiscal year Congress appropriated $500+ million more for Defense basic research than the Department requested. FY 2023 was not the first time. Defense requests for 2020, 2021, and 2022 also undershot persistent Congressional intent, and one could go back further. Maybe it’s a budget game where DoD low-balls basic research while relying on Congress to come to the rescue.
Such a game does not appear related to politics or political parties. One could guess that the Pentagon’s budget balancing staff undervalues basic research and uses it as a “bill payer” when trying to fix immediate problems or present a reasonable budget picture.
Of course, that is nonsensical because basic research can’t correct any big (or small) operational or acquisition funding crisis. It is about 1/3 of 1% of the Defense annual take. Maybe the permanent financial planning staffs in the Pentagon simply don’t understand the basic research track record.
Defense basic research may be small in dollars but big in invention and innovation and creating the scientific workforce for national security in war and peace. Creating a sufficient, excellent STEM workforce is a recognized national concern. Defense basic research funding aims at forward-looking research and at the same time trains future American STEM thought leaders and weds an indispensable fraction to careers attacking Defense technology challenges.
Defense decision makers could help ensure a more effective future capability and workforce, with wise, affordable, protected investment in basic research. Over 20 years ago, the Hart-Rudman Commission (U.S. Commission on National Security, Phase III Report) said: “…the decline in emphasis on science and education is the gravest threat to US national security ….”
Jesse H. Ausubel, director of the Program for the Human Environment at The Rockefeller University in New York City, has led several studies on the future security environment for the Office of the Secretary of Defense; Vice Admiral Paul Gaffney II, USN (Ret.) is president emeritus of Monmouth University, former president National Defense University and former Chief of Naval Research.
