The Pentagon is moving extremely slowly with the modernisation of its weapons, specifically the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) programme, which won't achieve full operational capability until 2035, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General John Hyten has stated during an event organised by the Brookings Institution. The reasons for this are simple: the Department of Defence is too bureaucratic and too cautious.
"The downside is, we’re still moving unbelievably slow. We’re so bureaucratic and we’re so risk averse […] It’s going to take us 10 to 15 years to modernize 400 [intercontinental ballistic missile] silos that already exist [under the GBSD programme]".
There would have been no rush for the US in this matter had it not been not for two countries: Russia and China, which Washington has designated as its most likely and most dangerous potential adversaries, and who have been actively modernising their weapons, including strategic ones, and even introducing new types – such as hypersonic missiles. And their pace surpasses that of the US greatly – according to Hyten, China is building "overnight" practically the same amount of missile silos that the US has to upgrade in the next decade. The Pentagon's progress in hypersonic weapons development has been lagging behind Russia and China too.
The general also noted that China is modernising and expanding its nuclear arsenal, adding that its speed causes concern in the Pentagon. He argued that the US won't be able to keep up with China and Russia at the current tempo.
"When you don't have any potential adversaries out there you can try to remove all risks in the system and you can go slow, but when you have a competitor like China and Russia [...] going fast, you have to be able to move fast as well. And we still move way too slow".
Hyten opined that there are several things that the Pentagon can change in order to speed up the process. Firstly, he suggested reaching out to the American commercial tech sector for innovations. Secondly, he believes that a significant portion of decision-making should be delegated from the Pentagon to the people actually managing the programme. He noted that earlier these people would make the calls, and if they were erroneous, quickly moved on, but nowadays they have to go "all the way to the Pentagon to get permission to do anything". This stagnates the process, the general believes.