“This We’ll Defend” has been the U.S. Army’s motto going back to the Revolutionary War. But that noble principle has been threatened in recent years, as the Army struggled to attract young men and women to enlist.
No longer. Thanks at least in part to the election of President Donald Trump, the Army recently announced that it met its 2025 recruiting target of 61,000 active-duty members four months early — its best performance in 13 years. That bodes well for the future, and it’s a reminder of the need for the Army to get all of the funding necessary to safeguard the nation.
The nation’s military is strongest when its different branches are balanced, working as a joint force where the Army’s ability to hold and secure territory complements the Air Force’s deep strike capabilities and the Navy’s forward power projection.
ENERGY WILL WIN THE AI ARMS RACE, AND CHINA IS BETTING ON IT
But that balance has been threatened recently by talk of a reduction in Army troop levels, perhaps as many as 90,000. That could lead to the abolition of several mission-critical programs and empower China and Russia.
Making matters worse, some people who should know better have exacerbated inter-service rivalries with their silo-like pronouncements. Earlier this year, the then-chief of staff of the Air Force, Gen. David Allvin, made headlines when he said the Air Force “must grow, even at the expense of other services.”
To make our military great again, as Trump intends to do, all branches of the military need adequate funding, including the Army, which is the backbone of our armed forces. There is still a significant need for the United States to maintain a powerful Army capable of moving troops quickly and safely across land.
Instead of cutting the Army, we should be investing more in supplying and arming our troops with advanced weapons and equipment. A strong Army will be needed in any future conflicts in the Indo-Pacific region, Central and Eastern Europe, or the Middle East.
Proponents of shifting funds away from the Army often claim that the future lies entirely in artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, autonomous drones and vehicles, and even space-based weapons systems. But a computer can’t replace human intuition, particularly during times of crisis and war. Wars have always been fought on fields, in cities, deserts, and mountains. It is troops, not computers, that secure the peace when conflicts end.
We need to double down on strengthening the Army industrial base, elements of which are antiquated. How antiquated? Earlier this year, the Army’s head of ammunition, Major General John T. Reim, told Congress that when he visited the Lake City ammunition plant in Missouri, he learned that nothing had been built there since … 1940.
“This chronic malnourishment of defense infrastructure means it is a challenge for depots and yards to maintain complex, modern weapons systems inside facilities that were designed for less complex equipment,” points out Mackenzie Eaglen of the American Enterprise Institute. She adds that, “Geriatric buildings often cannot accommodate advanced or additive manufacturing nor the ability to incorporate smart tools like AI.”
The Army needs funding to invest in new ammunition plants, expand domestic production of armored vehicles and missile components, and ensure that the supply chain for critical materials—from microchips to propellants—is resilient and American-made. The Army’s logistical power was once our greatest strategic advantage. We cannot afford to let that edge erode.
No one doubts the strength and capabilities of America’s fighting men and women. However, war is not theoretical. It is fought with tanks, bullets, helicopters, and some of the most advanced weaponry known to mankind. The Army’s munitions stockpiles are also dangerously low after years of supporting allies in Ukraine and Israel. Now is not the time to engage in service rivalries over funding – it’s time to expand the pie and balance the needs based on the threat risk.
VENEZUELA IS A HARDER NUT TO CRACK THAN NORIEGA’S PANAMA
Future wars are destined to have a heavy cyber component, but every conflict in human history has required soldiers to take and hold territory. This will not change in the foreseeable future. From stabilizing post-conflict regions and protecting civilians caught in the crossfire, these are missions that no drone, satellite, or algorithm can accomplish. This is the Army’s primary job and will remain so.
The Army has surpassed its recruitment goals and its troops are serving in some of the most demanding conditions in decades. They deserve a government that meets their commitment with equal resolve. Congress and the Trump administration must step up to support the Army and ensure that “This We’ll Defend” is not an empty slogan but rather a motto with meaning.
Fred Fleitz is a former Chief of Staff to the Trump National Security Council and a former CIA analyst.
