Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / New defense budget is more of the same
Grand strategy

May 28, 2021

New defense budget is more of the same

By Benjamin Friedman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
May 28, 2021
Contact: press@defensepriorities.org

WASHINGTON, DC—Today, President Biden is submitting his 2022 budget request to Congress, which includes a national security budget of $753 billion. Defense Priorities Policy Director Benjamin H. Friedman issued the following statement in response:

“The Biden administration’s request for $753 billion in national security spending is more of the same. It represents a continuation of the old military strategy of seeking global military dominance at a growing cost that has been bleeding the country with excessive spending and failing wars for decades. Contrary to its advertising, this budget does not refocus spending to meet an overhyped Chinese threat in Asia. That would involve shifting forces and funds away from ground forces, interminable occupations in the Middle East, and plans to fight big ground wars for rich allies. It doesn’t choose much at all, keeping funds flowing at a roughly constant rate, plus inflation, to the services and their present missions.

“A budget that accepted military spending cannot win endless small wars or prop up U.S. hegemony indefinitely would choose more and spend far less. By accepting that U.S. forces should help allies sustain a stable balance of power rather than overwhelm all potential adversaries in every theater it would enable focus. A more restrained strategy would save by focusing on commanding the global commons and maintaining long-range strike capability with air and sea forces. It would cut ground forces, administrative support, and personnel costs. By limiting conflict and risk, that strategy would enhance security at lower cost and aid the internal improvements that are the ultimate source of U.S. strength.”

Author

Photo of Benjamin Friedman

Benjamin
Friedman

Policy Director

Defense Priorities

More on Grand strategy

Op-edGrand strategy

Trump’s Golden Dome is a destabilizing pipe dream

By Thomas P. Cavanna

February 26, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy

How Trump’s Board of Peace is set up for a multibillion dollar fail

By Thomas P. Cavanna

February 19, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy, Asia, China

Trump’s Diego Garcia fears miss the strategic point

By Thomas P. Cavanna

February 17, 2026

In the mediaWestern Hemisphere, Grand strategy, Russia

Trump awards final contracts under U.S.-Finnish icebreaker partnership to Canada-linked defense company

Featuring Lyle Goldstein

February 11, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy, Iran, Ukraine, Ukraine‑Russia, US‑Israel‑Iran

What happens when we give Europe first dibs on U.S. missiles for war

By Jennifer Kavanagh

February 9, 2026

Op-edGrand strategy

Whatever happened to ‘America first?’

By Adam Gallagher

February 4, 2026

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGrand strategy, Military analysis

Assessing the 2026 NDS: How does it deal with defense deficits?

February 9, 2026
virtualEurope and Eurasia, Asia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Alignment with restraint?

February 9, 2026
virtualGlobal posture, Grand strategy, Military analysis

Assessing the 2026 NDS: What comes next?

February 9, 2026

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.