• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Gov. Romney on Defense Spending and US Foreign Policy

    Three years ago today at the United States Navy Memorial former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney delivered his first extended speech setting forth his vision on national security policy, what might be the first hints of the Romney Doctrine:

    We must confront clearly and courageously the threats to freedom, and we must resolutely sustain the capabilities we need to protect our security and sustain the cause of liberty….Our strategy is based on two principles: free enterprise and individual liberty.

    Romney described how a president should meet this challenge. The first step lies in properly ascertaining our defense needs. Rather than starting out with a dollar amount to spend on national security and then figuring out what resources — personnel, equipment, bases, etc. – could be purchased with it, Romney argued for a far superior approach.  “The right way to scaleAmerica’s defense budget,” he argued, “is to add up the requirements for each of our missions” and only then fashion a budget designed to meet those missions.

    He described five specific missions and one overarching one. The overarching one concerns missile defense. “Rarely in history,” he said, “has any development carried such awful possibilities as a nuclear-armed missile in the hands of evil men. And rarely in history has any program had the promise to do more good or spare more suffering than a system of missile defense.”

    Romney then set forth five specific national security missions:

    • Modernize our nuclear arsenal;
    • Be prepared to fight and win land wars and counter-insurgencies;
    • Control the commons – i.e., guarantee that our military can “move freely on the seas, in the air, and in space” in order to “protect trade, respond to humanitarian crises, provide essential support to our ground forces, as well as project our power to restrain the ambitions of tyrants and enhance our credibility as an ally.”
    • Provide counter-insurgency support for nations under threat from Jihadists; and
    • Increase our investment “to defend against…disruptions in communications and other technologies that our forces depend on.”

    “When I add up the demands of all these defense missions,” he concluded, “I do not come up with budget cuts.” Romney’s bottom line assessment of our defense needs three years and several rounds of budget cuts ago was that “we cannot fulfill our military missions without an increase of $50 billion per year in the modernization budget.”

    The gap between fulfilling these military missions and the budgetary resources available to the Pentagon has grown markedly since Romney delivered this speech. Whether we do so promises to be one of the most important issues debated during this presidential election year.

    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to Gov. Romney on Defense Spending and US Foreign Policy

    1. Bobbie says:

      Mr. Romney has much more stable, sound, honorable ways of handling things. A man who Obama's team spends lots of time and tax payers money to make a good man look bad while Obama hides all of himself he can. Even his place of birth he makes a game when the world is filled with people wanting to take this country down and Obama comes in wanting everyone's attention on Obama without vetting him. Won't even share his (experience) in foreign education no other president experienced and hid. Obama and his bunch take full advantage of this country while the lesser support him. Sure they'll be civil unrest because some people can't get over his skin color, they won't hold Obama accountable to be vetted as if as a man, he is lesser… God Bless the people who judge a man's character good or bad, where no skin color makes the man and where the supporting Obama supremacists will use skin color to ignore the damage he's intentionally causing… weak and disappointing out there in full force and no exactly who they are!!

    2. bobbymike says:

      Great to see he has set a priority of modernizing the nuclear arsenal. Believe it or not America we are quickly losing the ability to research, develop, produce and deploy a whole host of technologies necessary to do this. From a massively downsized and quickly retiring workforce to a shrinking industrial base.

      Can we even produce, in a 'normal' time frame, a new ICBM, SLBM, SSBN, Bomber or new nuclear weapon anymore?

      Let me clear – to paraphrase 'the One' – The entire nuclear enterprise is in dire shape and at tremendous risk of 'withering on the vine' from over two decades of neglect.

      Heritage has be great at discussing this issue…………..You HAVE TO DO EVEN MORE!

    3. Lloyd Scallan says:

      Romney seams to find his conservative side when he is running for President. Of course I'm sure the established GOP beat that theme into his head for the past 6 years he's been running. The real question is will Romney continue to be a friend to conservatism once and if he is elected? Or will he revert back to his Northeast liberal, RINO ways. Naturaly, a fence post would be a better President than Obama, but again, we have no other choice. The GOP made sure of that.

      • Bobbie says:

        I'd like to believe Romney sees the evil established and would bring America back to her true roots…

    4. yeah about that... says:

      the cynic in me knows he is lying about the freedom part and is really just doing this get ready for another invasion.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×