Renewal of National Defense Strategic Capabilities

Navy Magazine June 7

Navy Magazine June 7

Dear Director,

Everything indicates that sooner rather than later we will have to review the state of equipment of all the armed forces, not just the Navy. The last renewal undertaken by the three institutions occurred at the beginning of this millennium, at which time everything, except for a handful of F-16s, consisted of second-hand purchases in a market characterized by an oversupply due to the end of the Cold War, resulting in very good products at very good prices—something that is unlikely to be repeated due to the increased perception of risk stemming from the differences between China and the USA. Therefore, it would not be surprising if future investments in this area entail greater expenditures for equivalent capabilities.

The upcoming debate regarding the update of Chile’s defensive capabilities will compel us to reassess what interests we have as a country that we should protect, and consequently, the quality and quantity of armed forces we need, as well as, importantly, the availability of resources. In this regard, the ongoing review of defense policies and funding for strategic capabilities being conducted by the Ministry of Defense is very timely. This review must not only acknowledge the complexity of the current international context, which is primarily characterized by the end of the subsidy that North America provided to the world over the last 30 years, but also by the new emerging threats typical of modern times, such as cybersecurity issues, our borders with Bolivia, the impacts of climate change on people, and drug trafficking.

The potential increase in spending resulting from the reduced availability of used material will force us to compensate in other areas, necessitating efficiencies in the management of human capital, a more collective rather than individual approach in seeking solutions, and externally, the development of alliances with countries that share our interests and values, such as a strategic alliance in the South Pacific, or those that naturally emerge with those seeking stability in the Western Pacific.

Given its importance, civil society cannot and should not be distanced from this process, which has historically been managed by the executive through the Ministry of Defense and the armed forces with the approval of Congress. The definition of national interests is the key element upon which there must be consensus among all, as it ultimately derives the structure of forces that Chile needs and must finance. In 21st century Chile, it is no longer conceivable to approve large-scale investments without public agreement, and for this, National Defense must develop a narrative that explains to Chileans its purpose and what is understood by modern defense.

Richard Kouyoumdjian Inglis
Vice President of the AthenaLab Board