Defense industrial base unprepared for quick conflict responses, report warns

The defense industrial base is not ready for future conflicts and needs to develop a mobilization strategy for when crisis occur, according to a new report out of the Greg and Camille Baroni Center for Government Contracting at George Mason University.

The report entitled "Before the Balloon Goes Up: Mobilizing the Defense Industrial Base Now to Prepare for Future Conflict" offers readers some history lessons and recommendations on how to move forward.

“We do not have the capacity to equip and sustain our forces in the event of a major conflict in the Taiwan Strait or elsewhere,” said Jerry McGinn, executive director of the Baroni Center and the report’s author. “That’s why it is so imperative that government and industry leaders learn from past crises to create and implement a new national strategy to mobilize the defense industrial base and prepare now for future conflict.”

The report hits on eight key factors for improving preparedness:

• National mobilization strategy
• National leadership to build public support
• Increasing resources
• Maximizing manufacturing capacity
• Enhancing legal authorities
• Designing for producibility and streamlining equipment production
• Acquisition reform to expand and scale production
• Grow sustainment capacity

To develop those factors, the report offers four case studies: World War II, the development of the mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle known as an MRAP, the response to COVID-19, and the support for Ukraine’s war with Russia.

Each example is one of success, as are the warnings about being ill-prepared. For example, COVID-19 exposed weaknesses in the supply chain but also showed the industrial base's ability to produce and distribute vaccines rapidly.

The U.S. response to Ukraine has been robust, but munition stockpiles were quickly stressed.

“The rapid usage of munitions on the battlefield coupled with the inability to quickly increase production became immediately apparent. Long lead items, obsolete parts, systems no longer in production, and other factors underscored the urgent need for surge capacity in defense production,” the report states.

The report provides a series of recommendations for strengthening the ability to respond.

Among those are:

• Update the Defense Production Act and keep it focused on national security needs
• Simplifying the requirements process
• Increase defense funding levels to Cold War levels of 6%-to-7% of U.S. gross domestic product. Currently, it is 3% of GDP.
• Continue to prioritize open systems approaches
• Contract for speed and surge
• Grow overseas sustainment capacity
• Leadership that can state and restate the rationale for mobilization
• Prioritize international industrial collaboration