The Defense Department is planning to release its first-ever National Defense Industrial Strategy in January, a pre-decisional draft of which was obtained by Inside Defense earlier this month that calls for "generational change."
A formal roll-out scheduled for days ago had been planned by DOD officials internally -- but was not publicly announced -- and the Center for Strategic and International Studies postponed a Dec. 12 event with Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy Laura Taylor-Kale intended to discuss the strategy.
Pentagon spokesman Jeff Jurgensen said there are no problems with the strategy among DOD officials, just that it continues to be reviewed with a high-profile release anticipated next month.
The White House has said the strategy “will guide engagement, policy development and investment in the defense industrial base over the next three to five years,” ensuring a “whole-of-government approach to and focus on the multiple layers of suppliers and sub-suppliers that make up these critical supply chains.”
Pentagon acquisition chief Bill LaPlante told House lawmakers during a Dec. 12 hearing that the strategy’s release was expected “any day now” and highlighted its focus on supply chain security.
At that same hearing, Rep. Joe Courtney (D-CT) said he had been given a “sneak preview” of the strategy and offered LaPlante his compliments.
“It answers the question that every service branch needs to get answered,” he said.
The draft strategy lays out the challenge facing DOD in stark terms, especially regarding Chinese and Russian military advancements, noting that today's defense industrial base "does not possess the capacity, capability, responsiveness, or resilience required to satisfy the full range of military production needs at speed and scale."
Industry executives, however, have criticized the draft strategy for lacking detail, saying it contains mostly observations and insights, not a plan. However, DOD intends to craft an implementation plan following the strategy’s release.
The pre-decisional draft obtained by Inside Defense on Dec. 2 has been reviewed by think-tank analysts who offered some initial insights.
The strategy lays out four broad priorities “to serve as guiding beacons for industrial action and resource prioritization in support of the development of a modern industrial ecosystem that supports the nation’s defense”: resilient supply chains, workforce readiness, flexible acquisition and economic deterrence.
Jerry McGinn, a former DOD official who is now executive director at George Mason University’s Center for Government Contracting, said in an email that the draft is a “strong call to action that is needed given the challenges facing us today.”
McGinn said he particularly liked the draft strategy’s “recognition that it took decades for us to get into this situation (substantial drop in %GDP spend on defense, over focus on efficiency and cost, offshoring production of sub-tier materials, etc) and it will take years to fix.”
Additionally, McGinn said he is happy to see the document note the need for “flexible acquisition approaches to change the mindset in how DOD buys capabilities,” as well as “the importance of allies and partners as central to our industrial base.”
However, McGinn said the strategy is “very light on specifics.”
“So, the key will be the implementation plan,” he said.
Cynthia Cook, director of the Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group at CSIS, said in an email that strategy documents like the NDIS, while lacking in certain details, play an “interesting and important role in defense planning.”
“It’s clear that China represents a pacing challenge -- but putting this in writing gives it additional force,” she said. “It’s clear that supply chains, workforce, agile acquisition and working with allies and partners are important, and a strategy that lays this out should receive the same ‘respect’ as other strategies and should similarly be used to help drive resource decisions. The question is whether there will be adequate resources to make a difference, and this gets into policy choices, investment planning, and what Congress will be willing to fund.”