The Economist - UK (2022-04-02)

The Economist April 2nd 2022 UnitedStates 37

Thedefencebudget

Rhetoric v reality

B

yinvadingukraine, VladimirPutin

has revitalised the world’s democracies

and  strengthened  nato’s  resolve,  Presi­

dent Joe Biden told an audience in Warsaw

on March 26th. Two days later he submit­

ted  a  budget  to  Congress  that  included

$813bn  in  defence  spending.  He  called  it

“one of the largest investments in our na­

tional security in history”. 

The administration’s numbers may not

match its rhetoric. America’s defence bud­

get accounts for a whopping 40% of global

military  expenditures.  But  the  proposed

additional spending of $17bn above the to­

tal of $796bn expected this year represents

an increase of only 2%. 

That is lower than the budget’s project­

ed  rate  of  inflation  of  about  2.5%,  which

some  economists  think  is  optimistic,  giv­

en  the  pace  of  price  rises  so  far  this  year.

The administration prefers to highlight the

4% increase in the base budget for the De­

partment  of  Defence.  The  department’s

budget  excludes  such  things  as  spending

on nuclear warheads by the Department of

Energy, and supplemental outlays (for ex­

ample,  to  help  Ukraine  and  resettle  Af­

ghans who worked with America).

“This  is  going  to  be  a  real­terms  cut  in

defence  spending,”  says  Todd  Harrison  of

the  Centre  for  Strategic  and  International

Studies,  a  think­tank  in  Washington,  dc.

He predicts that Congress, which can mod­

ify the president’s request, will add a hefty

slice  of  extra  spending—perhaps  another

$30bn—just  as  it  did  for  the  current  year.

“The  politics  on  the  defence  budget  have

really  changed  substantially  in  the  past

two  months.  A  year  ago,  we  were  hearing

progressives  in  the  Democratic  Party  talk

about  trying  to  cut  the  defence  budget  by

10%. Those calls have gone silent.”

As a share of gdp, defence spending has

in  fact  fallen  over  the  years,  from  4.7%  in

2010  to  about  3.2%  this  year.  The  navy’s

fleet is set to shrink. And a nuclear­capable

sea­launched  cruise  missile  is  being  can­

celled. Leading Republicans have called for

a budget that adds 5% above inflation. If, as

seems  likely,  they  take  control  of  one  or

both houses of Congress in this year’s mid­

term elections, they will have the clout to

push for bigger increases. 

The president’s request is something of

a muddle. Although issued late, it does not

take  account  of  money  that  Congress  re­

cently  agreed  to  spend,  not  least  on  Uk­

raine.  Officials  acknowledge  that  it  may

have to be reviewed later in the year. What

is  more,  the  request  was  not  preceded,  as

was  expected,  by  the  publication  of  a  na­

tional­security strategy. 

Officials  insist  that  the  war  in  Ukraine

has not changed their underlying analysis:

Russia presents an acute menace and Chi­

na  is  the  longer­term  challenge.  Over  the

years the breakdown of spending has shift­

ed from the army to the navy and especially

the air force—a trend that continues in the

president’s request—to strengthen the lat­

ter two in Asia in particular. 

And a growing share, an extra 9.5%, has

gone  to  “research,  development,  test,  and

evaluation”,  not  least  in  artificial  intelli­

gence.  This  helps  to  maintain  America’s

military  edge  in  the  long  term,  but  gener­

ates little new capability in the meantime.

That suggests the administration does not

think it will be at war with China soon, de­

spite  the  warnings  of  somecommanders

that  China  could  try  toinvadeTaiwan  be­

fore the end of the decade.n

WASHINGTON, DC

A sense of strategy is missing from

Joe Biden’s defence-spending proposal

I

n the monthsinceRussiainvaded

Ukraine, Joe Biden has called Vladimir

Putin a “war criminal” and a “butcher”.

New polling from YouGov/The Economist

suggests that younger Americans are far

more equivocal in their views on Russia

and the war. 

Among some 1,500 people polled

between March 19th and 22nd, 73% said

they sympathise more with Ukraine than

with Russia. Yet this disguises a big

generational gap. Whereas 92% of those

aged 65 and over said they sympathise

more with Ukraine, just 56% of those

aged 18­29 did—a difference of 36 per­

centage points. 

Younger Americans are also less

bothered about the war’s outcome: barely

half of those under 30 said they care who

wins, compared with 90% of those over

65. And although Antony Blinken, Amer­
ica’s secretary of state, has formally
declared that Mr Putin is deliberately
targeting civilians, younger Americans
are not so sure. Just 47% of under­30s
said Russia was targeting civilians in­
tentionally. In contrast, 91% of older
Americans agree with Mr Blinken.
YouGov/The Economistalso conducted
polls in France and Britain during the
fourth week of March, and there, too, a
generational gap exists—though a small­
er one. What might explain it?
One possible reason is that, on aver­
age, younger people tend to be less en­
gaged in politics. Younger people who
said they were interested in politics were

moresympathetictoUkrainethantheir

less­engagedpeers.Butthegapbetween

well­informedolderAmericansand

well­informedyoungerAmericansisstill

wide,at 28 points,sothatcanbeonly

partofthestory.

Perhapsthewarseemsdistantto

youngAmericansdisillusionedbyfar­

awayconflictsinAfghanistanandIraq.

HistoricalfearsofRussiamayplaya role,

too.Americans 65 andoldercameofage

duringthecoldwar.Thoseagedunder 30

werebornafter1992,whentheSoviet

Unionhadcollapsed.Yesteryear’sexperi­

encemaystillcolourtoday’sviews.

Ourpollonthewar

Older andwiser?

Views on the war reveal astrikinggenerationaldivide

The age of reasoning

United States, Mar 19th-22nd 2022, % responding

Source:YouGov/TheEconomist

65+

0 25 50 75 100

“ Who do you sympathise with more?”

18-2 Ukraine Neither/unsure

Russia

18-2

65+

“Do you think Russia is deliberately targeting

civilians in Ukraine?”

Ye s Not sure N o

18-2

65+

“Do you care who wins?”

Ye s Not sure No