The Top

The rising risk of global conflicts is changing the way the U.S. approaches its aero-defense capabilities. A robust and up-to-date stockpile of defense aviation equipment is key for the country to stave off potential attacks from its foes and keep allies assured that they can count on the U.S. 

All of that, however, depends on how fast and efficiently Congress can work to deliver the funds needed to keep the defense sector up to date with the latest technology and the rising demand.

Over the next four weeks, we’ll explore how the U.S. government, Congress and the private sector are shaping the future of defense aviation.

In this first segment of our four-part series, we provide an overview of the state of the defense aviation industry and the factors shaping it.

Be sure to also listen to the accompanying podcast here.

The State of Play

The U.S. has long used its defense production capacity — the best in the world — as a critical tool for deterring conflicts and strengthening its alliances.

Aero defense equipment is a particularly critical part of that equation, especially as the risk of global conflicts rises. It’s also an incentive for allies and security partners to avoid relying on hostile foreign governments like Russia for key defense supplies.

That’s why Congress has teamed up with private industry to ensure continued production of advanced fighter jets and other types of defense aircraft such as the F-35 and F-16.

The Russia-Ukraine war that began more than two years ago, however, was a wake-up call about the dismal state of America’s defense industrial base. Lawmakers from both parties acknowledge the U.S. just isn’t producing air defense machinery fast enough to meet current and future demands.

A slow Congress: Lawmakers control the purse strings through the defense policy bill and the defense appropriations process each year. Relying on Congress for funding often comes with frustrations for both industry and the Department of Defense.

Old-fashioned political maneuvering, spending caps and a notoriously glacial legislative process complicate efforts to keep up with the rapid technological advancements of America’s adversaries.

Levantovscaia said Congress needs to signal that it can deliver timely appropriations that meet the Defense Department’s needs. That process is set into gear annually through the National Defense Authorization Act, which charts out U.S. defense policy for the next year. 

While lawmakers generally agree on harnessing U.S. air defense capabilities to deter enemies and strengthen allies, Congress often finds itself at odds with the executive branch on such issues.

For example, the Biden administration faced strong opposition from Congress for months as it tried to get approval to sell new F-16 fighter jets to Turkey.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers opposed the sale outright, citing Turkey’s deteriorating human rights record as well as its constant incursions into Greek airspace. That opposition grew over time as Turkey’s government continued to block Finland and Sweden’s swift accession to NATO.

The sale was eventually completed, but the saga shows it’s not always a slam dunk to use aviation modernization as a tool of diplomacy.

Lawmakers from both parties routinely tell us the current great-power tensions are at their highest since World War II, leading to a bipartisan push to avoid making the same mistakes that allowed that war to go on for as long as it did. 

“My biggest concern is that we would look like we’re not ready for a fight,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told us recently. “It’s a lot cheaper to prevent war — even though you have to spend more on defense — than it is to fight one.” 

– Andrew Desiderio

The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement.