Ethical Hacking News
The US Department of Defense is under pressure to cut its threat reduction programs, which aim to secure loose nuclear weapons and prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The proposed cuts could compromise America's ability to investigate and attribute chemical attacks in Eastern Europe, and eliminate its role in preventing the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
The US Department of Defense is considering cutting up to 75% of workers in its threat reduction programs. The proposed cuts would significantly impact funding for programs aimed at preventing the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Experts warn that reducing these programs could have devastating consequences for global and domestic security. The cuts could compromise America's ability to investigate and attribute chemical attacks in Eastern Europe. Reducing these programs would cripple the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) program and eliminate its ability to prevent the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. The cost-savings from these cuts would be relatively marginal compared to the Pentagon's $850 billion budget.
The United States Department of Defense is on the cusp of a drastic reduction in its threat reduction programs, which aim to secure loose nuclear weapons and prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. According to documents obtained by WIRED, the Pentagon is considering cutting up to 75 percent of workers who stop the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
The Trump administration's assault on foreign aid spending has led to a review of all humanitarian assistance, security cooperation, and cooperative threat-reduction efforts. The Department of Defense has made it clear that all spending must align with Secretary Pete Hegseth's three priorities: deterring China, increasing border security, and pushing allies to shoulder more of the burden.
The proposed cuts to these programs could have devastating consequences for global and domestic security. According to a draft working paper provided to WIRED, reducing funding by 20 percent would significantly hurt programs to surveil and prevent infectious disease outbreaks in Africa, and worsen biosafety and biosecurity programs at biological laboratories worldwide.
A 40 percent reduction in funding would limit funding for counter-extremism programs in Africa and the Middle East, close all mine-clearance operations, shut down programs to intercept and prevent the development of weapons of mass destruction, and completely shut down biological surveillance programs. A 60 percent cut would be more severe still, fundamentally eliminating America's role in preventing the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
The Department of Defense is also considering cutting funding for virological samples, which are used to track and prevent infectious disease outbreaks. This could compromise the country's ability to investigate and attribute chemical attacks in Eastern Europe, which is a form of deterrence.
Experts warn that reducing these programs would be akin to "a fire sale on expertise." Gigi Gronvall, a professor at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, says that these programs are primarily national security initiatives designed to give America the eyes and ears around the world to prevent emerging threats from growing out of control.
"If you don't put out the fire—whether it's a novel infectious disease or a chemical weapons program in a rogue state—it will keep growing," Gronvall adds. "We have areas of the world that don’t have fire departments." By helping these countries help themselves, America is helping them step up their own security efforts.
The proposed cuts to these programs are part of a broader review of all foreign aid spending, which has been mandated by President Donald Trump's executive order on January 20. The Department of Defense has made it clear that all spending must align with the secretary’s three priorities: deterring China, increasing border security, and pushing allies to shoulder more of the burden.
However, experts warn that these cuts could have a domino effect on other programs run in conjunction with the State Department and other agencies. One long-standing project facing cuts under this review is the State Partnership Program, which sends National Guard members to liaise and train with friendly militaries abroad.
These cuts could also eliminate America's ability to investigate and attribute chemical attacks in Eastern Europe, which is a form of deterrence. Without this capability, experts warn that rogue states will see an opportunity to use more chemical weapons.
The United States believes that Russia, North Korea, and other rogue states have active biological weapons programs. Despite this, no state has actually deployed a biological weapon since the adoption of the Biological Weapons Convention. Experts are worried that dismantling these programs could weaken this prohibition.
In recent years, the Department of Defense's threat reduction efforts have included destroying chemical weapons in Syria, securing highly enriched uranium in Kazakhstan, and upgrading security at infectious disease laboratories in Ukraine. These efforts have been led by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), which takes a critical role in counter-proliferation efforts on chemical, biological, and nuclear threats.
The proposed cuts to these programs would cripple the DTRA program and eliminate its ability to prevent the spread of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons. Without this capability, experts warn that America's national security would be severely compromised.
The cost-savings from these cuts would be relatively marginal compared to the Pentagon's $850 billion budget. The Department of Defense only spends about $19 billion on humanitarian assistance, security cooperation, and cooperative threat-reduction programs, including DTRA—of that, the proposed cuts would eliminate between $5 billion and $15 billion.
A source with knowledge of the funding review says that a decision has yet to be made about the exact level of these cuts, and that meetings are ongoing to decide which agencies or programs will be hit and how hard. A final decision is due in mid-April, at the end of the 90-day window set out in the January 20 executive order.
As the clock ticks down on this critical deadline, experts are urging caution and warning that these cuts could have far-reaching consequences for global security.
Related Information:
https://www.ethicalhackingnews.com/articles/Pentagons-Threat-Reduction-Efforts-Under-Siege-Can-America-Stay-Ahead-of-Rogue-States-ehn.shtml
https://www.wired.com/story/pentagon-cuts-nukes-chemical-weapons-wmd/
https://www.npr.org/2025/02/20/nx-s1-5303947/hegseth-trump-defense-spending-cuts
Published: Thu Mar 6 14:55:33 2025 by llama3.2 3B Q4_K_M
