Day 16 of reading and sharing my notes on Project 2025 (the long title is Mandate for Leadership 2024: The Conservative Promise, in case you're searching for it).

Here's my approach and why I’m doing this.

We're still in Chapter 4: Department of Defense by Christopher Miller. I covered his bio earlier.

On to the section on the U.S. Navy.

SUMMARY

More on how China is a threat to the U.S. Navy's "ability to accomplish its mission in the Pacific and Indian Oceans."

His suggested reforms:

1. "Invest in and expand force structure."

2. "Reestablish the General Board."

3. "Establish a Rapid Capabilities Office."

4. "Accelerate the purchase of key munitions."

5. "Enhance warfighter development."

MY OPINION

I have never heard this said this way, and maybe it's common in military circles, but I find it gross. He says the Navy's forces act with other branches "to project power outside sovereign territory, principally by operating in international water."

I should perhaps mention here that I am a pacifist at my core. I understand and respect people's service, and I realize that peace is an ideal. I think it's one worth working toward. Yes, that makes things complicated and contradictory, but the world I want is one where a military either isn't necessary (I admit this is only a dream) or where its role is quite different, providing defense and encouraging nonviolent movements, which are remarkably effective, in places all over the world. I linked to a great TEDX talk in the comments on the success of nonviolent movements from a former skeptic.

I think deep down most of us want that. I also realize that isn't going to happen. So my general perspective is always: How can we take tiny steps toward that? Moving toward a more peaceful world, with all the complexities and practicalities that entails, is what I want from our policymakers.

All right. I'll step back off my soapbox.

SUMMARY

That first reform is self-explanatory. The second isn't, so I'll add some detail. Apparently there was a Navy General Board that planned for ship development, and now there's a joint process. Miller argues the first was more efficient and "the individual board members would ensure a broad base of knowledge as well as independent thinking."

MY OPINION

It would take more outside research than I'm going to do to understand the rationale here. Feel free, if you're interested.

SUMMARY

Miller argues that we need to get technology into the field more rapidly.

MY OPINION

One thing he says here is to "Harness innovation and willingness to tolerate risk so that 'good enough' systems can be fielded rapidly." My question here is what kind of risk? Are we talking about things not working as well as we'd like or needing repairs along the way? Okay. Are we talking about risks to service members? No. He's not specific, and I wish he was.

SUMMARY

Under "enhance warfighter development," he says people should have to have experience with war games for being promoted, among other things.

MY OPINION

I assumed that was happening, but I know nothing about Navy training.

SUMMARY

On to the section on the U.S. Air Force.

Miller starts, "The U.S. Air Force today lacks a force structure with the lethality, survivability, and capacity to fight a major conflict with a great power like China, deter nuclear threats, and meet its other operational requirements under the National Defense Strategy." He says the Air Force is underfunded and its weapons are agin.

MY OPINION

If all this is right about the armed services being underfunded (and I'm not saying it is), where is our insanely massive military budget going?

SUMMARY

His suggested reforms:

1. "Increase spending and budget accuracy in line with a threat-based strategy."

2. "Reduce near-term and mid-term risk." (This is about buying more planes and munitions, including nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles and electronic warfare aircraft, both to combat China.

3. "Invest in future Air Force programs and efforts." This is also about investing in technology.

On to the U.S. Marines section.

Miller argues that operations in Afghanistan turned the Marines into "a second land army," and that it should return to "amphibious operations that are necessary for the projection of naval power." He is supportive of Commandant General David H. Berger's Force Design 2030, "a plan that, if completed, would be the most radical transformation of the Marine Corps since World War II."

His suggested reforms:

1. "Divest systems to implement the Force Design 2030 tranformation."

2. "Transform the USMC personnel paradigm."

3. "Align Navy amphibious shipbuilding with Force Design 2030."

MY OPINION

Learning about Force Design 2030 would be another whole project that I'm not going to get into, so I'm going to use Miller's characterization here. I did a VERY quick search, and it seems like his summary is accurate. If this interests you, you can Google it and go down a deep rabbit hole.

SUMMARY

Under the first point above, the Marines would get rid of law enforcement battalions and reduce the size of infantry battalions. It would get rid of tanks and tube artillery batteries, as well as Advanced Amphibious Assault Vehicles and use those funds to buy rocket artillery batteries, create more Light Armored Vehicle companies, buy more drones and counter-drones, and develop long-range strike and anti-ship missiles, as well as to modernize infantry equipment.

Under the second point, he advocates changing the rank structure so junior officers aren't put in key combat positions, which he says creates problems with retention. He suggests aligning the rank structure with the Army's and reducing "unnecessary deployments."

The next section is on the U.S. Space Force.

MY OPINION

I remember hearing at the time that Space Force was a terrible name for a really important function. So don't discount this section because there's a show on Netflix with the same name.

SUMMARY

Miller explains the Space Force's mission this way: "U.S. space forces conduct global space operations to sustain and enhance air, land, and sea effectiveness, lethality, and superiority by providing secure broadband global communications (precision position, navigation, and timing accuracy); attack warning and threat tracking and targeting capability (real-time intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance information); and their assured continuity of operations both by defending U.S. assets and by conducting offensive operations that are capable of imposing unacceptable losses on adversaries that might seek to them.

"The U.S. Space Force was established to assure continuous global and theater combat support from space, to deter attacks against U.S. space assets, and to prevail in space should deterrence fail. The USSF posture was conceived as a balance of offensive and defensive deterrent capabilities ..."

Miller's suggested reforms:

1. "Reverse the Biden Administration's defensive posture."

2. "Reduce overclassification."

3. "Implement policies suited to a mature USSF."

Most of the first point is self-explanatory.

**-"Seek arms control and 'rules of the road' understanding only when they are unambiguously in the interests of the U.S. and its allies, and prohibit their unilateral implementation."

MY OPINION

It seems good to have some international "rules of the road" about how we work in space.

SUMMARY

Under the second point, Miller says the Space Force shouldn't classify so much information to "facilitate greater coordination" across the government and with "commercial sectors."

MY OPINION

Given some issues with Elon Musk messing up Ukraine's satellite communications and him having government contracts, I would be reticent to declassify information to work with the commercial sector. I'm not saying never, just that I think caution is good.

Under the last point:

**-"Lead the U.S. government's development of a clear and unambiguous declaratory policy that the United States will operate at will in space and enforce these operations with capabilities that ensure effective deterrence and the ability to impose our will if necessary."

MY OPINION

That is terrifying. And why do we have the right to control space and "impose our will"?

I'll stop there for now. The next section in this chapter is on U.S. Cyber Command, followed by Special Operations Forces, Nuclear Deterrence, and Missile Defense. It's a long one.