OBSERVARE
Universidade Autónoma de Lisboa
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026
137
REBUILDING THE “ARSENAL OF DEMOCRACY”: A STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT OF
THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL DEFENSE INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY
TRAN BACH HIEU
bachhieu2020@gmail.com
Ph.D. He is Head of the Faculty of Laws, International Relation and Politics, Thai Binh University
(Vietnam). His research focuses on International Relation in Asia - Pacific Region, Global Issues
and Comparative Politics. https://orcid.org/0009-0002-3037-2182
LE HOANG KIET
kietlh.tg@yersin.edu.vn
Ph.D Candidate at the Faculty of International Studies, University of Social Sciences and
Humanities, Vietnam National University, Hanoi (Vietnam). His research focuses on exploring
competitive power relations among great powers through realism and geopolitical theories.
https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9968-1952
TRAN XUAN HIEP
txhiep@ued.udn.vn
Associate Professor, Ph.D. He is Lecturer at The University of Da Nang, University of Science and
Education (Vietnam). His research interests include general political and international relations
issues, the Southeast Asian and Indo-Pacific regions, and Vietnam’s international integration.
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5236-993X
Abstract
This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of the US’ National Defense Industrial Strategy
(NDIS), announced by the Department of Defense in January 2024 as a strategic response to
the evolving dynamics of global security. Amid growing competition among major powers -
particularly from China and Russia - the NDIS aims to revitalize the US DIB through four
strategic pillars: (a) enhancing supply chain resilience, (b) developing a high-quality and
diverse workforce, (c) reforming procurement processes, and (d) strengthening international
cooperation for economic deterrence. Employing a systemic-structural approach, the study
integrates qualitative methods such as policy analysis, document analysis, interpretive
techniques, and strategic forecasting to scientifically examine the objectives, implementation
mechanisms, strengths, and limitations of the NDIS. While the strategy presents a robust and
forward-looking framework, it also faces significant structural limitations, including (a)
concerns about financial sustainability, (b) internal tensions between protectionist policies and
global cooperation goals, (c) innovation bottlenecks, and (d) a lack of comparative analysis
with the capabilities of “potential” adversaries. By addressing a notable gap in existing
academic research, this paper provides in-depth insights into the NDIS. The findings
contribute to a deeper understanding of how the US seeks to maintain technological
superiority and strategic primacy in a turbulent international system marked by rising
instability and complex security threats.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
138
Keywords
Defense, strategic competition, National Defense Industrial Strategy, Department of Defense,
United States.
Resumo
Este artigo fornece uma análise abrangente da Estratégia Industrial de Defesa Nacional (EIDN)
dos EUA, anunciada pelo Departamento de Defesa em janeiro de 2024 como uma resposta
estratégica às dinâmicas evolutivas da segurança global. Em meio à crescente competição
entre as grandes potências - particularmente da China e da Rússia - a EIDN visa revitalizar a
Base Industrial de Defesa dos EUA através de quatro pilares estratégicos: (a) aprimoramento
da resiliência da cadeia de suprimentos, (b) desenvolvimento de uma força de trabalho de
alta qualidade e diversificada, (c) reforma dos processos de aquisição, e (d) fortalecimento
da cooperação internacional para dissuasão económica. Empregando uma abordagem
sistémico-estrutural, o estudo integra métodos qualitativos como análise de políticas, análise
documental, técnicas interpretativas e previsão estratégica para examinar cientificamente os
objetivos, mecanismos de implementação, pontos fortes e limitações da EIDN. Embora a
estratégia apresente uma estrutura robusta e visionária, também enfrenta limitações
estruturais significativas, incluindo (a) preocupações sobre sustentabilidade financeira, (b)
tensões internas entre políticas protecionistas e objetivos de cooperação global, (c) gargalos
de inovação, e (d) falta de análise comparativa com as capacidades de adversários
“potenciais”. Ao abordar uma lacuna notável na investigação académica existente, este artigo
fornece perspetivas aprofundadas sobre a EIDN. As conclusões contribuem para uma
compreensão mais profunda de como os EUA procuram manter a superioridade tecnológica e
a primazia estratégica num sistema internacional turbulento marcado pela crescente
instabilidade e ameaças de segurança complexas.
Palavras-chave
Defesa, competição estratégica, Estratégia Industrial de Defesa Nacional, Departamento de
Defesa, Estados Unidos.
How to cite this article
Hieu, Tran Bach, Kiet, Le Hoang & Hiep, Tran Xuan (2025). Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”:
A Strategic Assessment of the United States National Defense Industrial Strategy. Janus.net, e-
journal of international relations. VOL. 16, Nº. 2, November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156. DOI
https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.16.2.8
Article submitted on 19th July 2025 and accepted for publication on 9th September 2025.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
139
REBUILDING THE “ARSENAL OF DEMOCRACY”: A STRATEGIC
ASSESSMENT OF THE UNITED STATES NATIONAL DEFENSE
INDUSTRIAL STRATEGY
TRAN BACH HIEU
LE HOANG KIET
TRAN XUAN HIEP
Introduction
Global politics is currently witnessing a profound geostrategic transformation phase,
marked by the reshaping of the power balance between major powers and the erosion of
the foundation of the current international order (Levy & Singhal, 2025). The
contemporary era is characterized by an unprecedented level of geopolitical instability
since the end of the Cold War, with increasingly evident geostrategic fault lines across
the global spectrum (Kiet & Hiep, 2025, p. 3). The Russia-Ukraine conflict has
transitioned into a protracted conflict phase with extensive strategic consequences, as
Russia accelerates the transformation of its socioeconomic structure to a wartime model
and intensifies military campaigns in Ukraine (Global Conflict Tracker, 2025).
Concurrently, the Middle East situation faces the risk of conflict expansion from the
Israel-Hamas flashpoint into a comprehensive regional confrontation, with complex
developments in the Red Sea, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran significantly increasing the risk of
escalation into a regional-level conflict (Financial Times, 2024). In this context, China’s
rise under President Xi Jinping with increasingly evident geopolitical ambitions through
“wolf warrior diplomacy” has reshaped the security environment in the Indo-Pacific region
(Kiet et al., 2025). Beijing’s robust military modernization combined with assertive “nine-
dash line” claims in the East Sea, particularly regarding the Taiwan issue, has created
urgent challenges to the US-led regional security architecture in this region (Soong,
2021; Kiet et al., 2024).
The intersection of these strategic competitive dynamics has prompted a systemic shift
in how the Biden administration perceives and responds to the increasingly complex
multi-dimensional security environment. To effectively address these geostrategic
fluctuations and maintain superior military-technological positioning, the US Department
of Defense (DoD) released the National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS) on January
11, 2024, as a comprehensive policy framework in efforts to restore the “arsenal of
democracy” coordinated between the US and Western allies. The NDIS establishes a
strategic vision and four priority pillars aimed at restructuring and enhancing the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
140
resilience of the US Defense Industrial Base (DIB) against diverse and increasingly
sophisticated threats from nations intending to end the US-led “rules-based” world order.
This strategy builds upon the foundation of the 2022 National Defense Strategy (NDS),
while emphasizing a systematic and integrated approach in mobilizing DoD resources to
“build multifaceted partnerships with domestic and international stakeholders to
strengthen the DIB, optimize logistics systems, and enhance the resilience of global
defense supply chains against sabotage, infiltration, and technology theft” (US
Department of Defense, 2022). Entering his second term in 2025, President Donald
Trump has not yet made substantial adjustments to the NDIS, and has even proposed
cutting budgets in healthcare, education, and clean energy sectors to increase defense
funding (Kapur, 2025). Simultaneously, President Donald Trump has implemented
reforms in foreign weapons sales within the NDIS framework to improve rapid weapons
transfer to partners (White House, 2025) - President Trump’s actions demonstrate that
the DoD will inherit and continue implementing the NDIS despite it being a strategy
developed under President Joe Biden - whom President Trump claims left “a huge mess”
for US.
Although the NDIS holds particular importance for the US as well as countries worldwide,
the global academic database contains a research gap in conducting in-depth and
comprehensive analysis of the content, impact, and potential limitations of the NDIS.
Since the DoD released the NDIS in early 2024 until the present (May 2025), a review of
all Scopus/WoS academic data through keyword search for “National Defense Industrial
Strategy” has not revealed any in-depth international research analyzing this strategy.
This research aims to fill this important knowledge gap through systematic analysis of
NDIS content, assessment of its implications, and identification of fundamental
advantages and limitations in this policy design. The research findings will not only
enhance deep understanding of strategic directions in US defense technology, but also
provide valuable insights for other countries in developing appropriate policy responses
in a global security environment undergoing profound and comprehensive
transformations.
2. Methodology
The research is designed on a systemic-structural approach through utilizing policy
analysis methods to systematically examine the NDIS. Simultaneously, this research
integrates document analysis and strategic interpretation and forecasting techniques to
provide a scientific, logical research process for detailed assessment of the strengths and
weaknesses of the NDIS. The research design follows a structured analytical framework
with three interconnected phases:
The first phase conducts an extensive and systematic literature review, focusing on key
data sources. Specifically, the research collects and analyzes: (a) the original text of the
NDIS and accompanying technical appendices; (b) supplementary official documentation
from the DoD, including strategic reports, policy statements, and implementation plans;
(c) policy messages from relevant US government agencies; and (d) in-depth analyses
from the international security research community through media channels. This
document synthesis methodology allows for building a solid knowledge foundation about
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
141
the internal components of the NDIS, the strategic-historical context of policy formation,
and multidimensional assessments from global defense and security experts.
The second phase deploys policy analysis methods, combining interpretive techniques
and document analysis to decode and evaluate the four strategic pillars of the NDIS. This
process includes in-depth examination of: (a) the theoretical foundation and conceptual
framework underlying strategic priorities; (b) specific policy implications and practical
application capabilities; (c) implementation mechanisms and performance evaluation
indicators; and (d) potential barriers in strategy execution.
The final phase focuses on comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness, feasibility,
advantages, and limitations of the NDIS. This includes thorough examination of the
strategy’s alignment with broader US foreign security policy objectives, its potential
impact on international defense cooperation, and its responsiveness to contemporary
global security challenges, particularly in protecting allies in the European region and the
Indo-Pacific region.
In general, this methodology ensures a rigorous, multidimensional, and highly systematic
analytical process, allowing the research not only to capture the technical and strategic
aspects of the NDIS, but also to assess the broader implications of this strategy for global
security architecture in the context of ongoing power competition between major powers.
3. Results
3.1. Overview of the NDIS: Four Pillars for Sustainable Development of
US Defense Capabilities in the Context of Global Strategic Competition
The NDIS represents a significant strategic shift in the US approach to the DIB through
a comprehensive policy framework released on January 11, 2024 (Cook, 2024). This 59-
page strategic document concretizes the foundational principles established in the NDS,
reflecting a profound understanding of the systemic challenges facing the US defense
industrial ecosystem amid rapidly changing international security conditions. Status
assessments in the NDIS have identified structural weaknesses including bureaucratic
system inertia, lack of flexibility in adapting to emerging technologies, and uneven
investment in human resource development and supply chain optimization (Department
of Defense, 2023). The core objective of the NDIS is to build an advanced, highly resilient,
and rapidly adaptable defense industrial ecosystem, not only to effectively deter US
strategic competitors but also to promptly meet increasing production demands in an
increasingly unstable security environment (US Department of Defense, 2024a). Laura
Taylor-Kale, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Industrial Base Policy, who led the
research team developing the NDIS, emphasized the strategic importance of this
initiative:
We are implementing the NDIS with the goal of ensuring that the DIB not
only continues to be the foundation for domestic national security, but also
serves as a key tool in reassuring and supporting our global network of allies
and partners (US Department of Defense, 2024a).
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
142
The NDIS shapes three key strategic objectives with specific implementation roadmaps:
(a) Comprehensive modernization of defense and deterrence capabilities through focused
investment in technological innovation, enhancing supply chain resilience, and promoting
extensive international cooperation with strategic allies prioritized in the NSS. The
strategy emphasizes engaging partner countries more deeply in the production and
processing stages of essential materials, aiming to minimize dependence on potentially
“confrontational” nations such as China, Russia, and other non-allied countries (American
Economic Association, 2024); (b) Ensuring the DIB is optimized to effectively address
national security challenges within the medium-term strategic timeframe of 3-5 years
(Levantovscaia, 2024). This objective recognizes the increasingly complex and
unpredictable geopolitical environment due to fluctuations from the prolonged Russia-
Ukraine conflict and China’s increasing military actions around the Taiwan Strait; and (c)
Building and maintaining a modern, robust, autonomous, and rapidly adaptive DIB to
effectively implement comprehensive deterrence strategy and consolidate the US’s
superior global position (Taylor, 2024).
The NDIS focuses on four strategic priorities, with each pillar encompassing specific
priority areas along with expected outcomes and measurable outputs:
a) First Pillar: Building Flexible and Responsive Supply Chains
The NDIS establishes as its first key foundation the creation of a supply chain ecosystem
with high adaptability and immediate response capabilities. This structure is designed to
ensure continuous production capability of essential products, services, and technologies
meeting military force requirements-not only for the present but also anticipating future
needs-at optimal scale and reasonable cost (Industrial Base Policy, 2024). Implementing
this model requires synchronized development of multiple multidimensional coordination
mechanisms. To achieve this goal, the NDIS advocates building a comprehensive public-
private cooperation system, in which risk-sharing and technology transfer mechanisms
are systematically established, creating incentives for the private sector to invest in
developing contingency capabilities and enhancing resilience after disruption events.
Concurrently, this strategy proposes significantly increasing strategic reserves for critical
systems and materials, while promoting supplier network diversification within the DIB,
expanding diverse production methods, and implementing comprehensive solutions to
effectively respond to cybersecurity threats targeting supply chains (Handfield, 2024).
The totality of these measures aims to ensure “flexible and timely responsiveness under
all operational conditions and strategic scenarios” (US Department of Defense, 2024a).
Complex developments from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Russia-Ukraine conflict, along
with shifts in the balance of power between global powers-particularly US-China strategic
competition-have clearly demonstrated that excessive dependence on specific supply
sources can lead to serious disruptions in supply chains, directly affecting national
security. In this context, the NDIS is promoting a comprehensive restructuring process
of the supply chain system oriented toward diversification and risk distribution. This
strategy includes developing manufacturing centers distributed across various
geographical regions within US territory and strategic allied countries such as the EU,
Japan, South Korea, Australia, Philippines; enhancing domestic production capacity for
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
143
critical components; and researching alternative materials for scarce strategic raw
materials, especially rare metals and rare earth elements (US Department of Defense,
2024c).
Recent research data reveals an important reality regarding China’s weapons production
capacity: the country currently accounts for 5.8% of total global arms exports during the
2019-2023 period, making China the fourth largest conventional weapons supplier in the
world, behind only the US, France, and Russia (Gunter and Legarda, 2024). Notably,
Chinese weapons technology is gradually dominating markets in South Asia, Sub-
Saharan Africa, and Southeast Asia regions, while expanding influence into Central Asia
and the Middle East. This phenomenon not only creates economic impacts but also
changes the geopolitical landscape, directly affecting governments and defense industries
of the US and its European allies. Facing strong and challenging development from
China’s weapons industry, the DoD is implementing a strategy integrating advanced
technologies such as 3D printing, advanced automation, and industrial internet of things
to significantly enhance flexibility and rapid response capability of the defense production
system (US Department of Defense, 2024c). Research Director and Senior Fellow at the
Carnegie Middle East Center - Hamzawy (2025), has provided the insightful observation
that conflicts between major powers in the current era will take the nature of prolonged
wars of attrition, in which the ability to rapidly expand production capacity during crisis
periods will play a decisive role in determining the final outcome of future conflicts.
Therefore, developing a highly adaptable and rapidly expandable production system is
not merely a strategic choice but a survival factor in maintaining military advantage and
ensuring US national security in the new era of strategic competition.
b) Second Pillar: Developing Highly Specialized and Diverse Human Resources
The NDIS focuses on developing a special workforce that not only meets quantitative
requirements but must also achieve high standards of professional quality while reflecting
the inherent diversity of US society (Industrial Base Policy, 2024). This strategy is not
simply an ordinary recruitment plan, but a comprehensive vision aimed at building an
elite workforce capable of adaptation and innovation in the unprecedented rapidly
developing defense technology environment. Drawing lessons from the Russia-Ukraine
conflict, the NDIS has identified the strategic priority of focusing on developing high-
quality human resources particularly in advanced combat technology fields, including
modern air defense systems, unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) technology, and hypersonic
missile systems. These fields have proven decisive importance in modern conflicts and
require specialist teams with exceptionally high expertise.
Parallel to enhancing professional quality, the NDIS also emphasizes expanding
recruitment scope toward traditionally undertapped communities, especially women and
ethnic minority groups (Indo-Pacific Defense Forum, 2024). This strategy aims not only
to create a workforce more representative of the US demographic structure but also to
comprehensively leverage diverse talent and perspectives from all sectors of society.
Research shows that diverse working groups typically have more creative problem-
solving abilities and deliver higher productivity in complex technical environments.
Parameter, DoD’s Talent Development Director, emphasized the urgency in attracting
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
144
young workforce with a strategic observation: “If we don’t bring more Generation Z
members into this workforce, we will not be able to fulfill our mission” (Shinego, 2025).
This statement reflects deep concern about ensuring continuity and sustainability in
defense workforce development, especially when facing the upcoming retirement wave
of the current generation of senior technical experts.
To realize this vision, the US government has implemented a system of multifaceted
collaborative initiatives between leading research universities, specialized technical
training institutions, and businesses in the defense industry. Scholarship and internship
programs have been significantly expanded in scale, creating opportunities for talented
students to access the defense industry from the early stages of their professional
training (Shinego, 2025). To address the shortage of high-quality human resources in
the semiconductor field, the DoD has expanded $11 million in funding to Purdue
University during 2022-2027 to strengthen training for US’s future microchip workforce,
as Washington consumes approximately 50% of microchips produced worldwide but only
about 12% of microchips are manufactured domestically (Vincent, 2022). Additionally,
the SMART scholarship is a flagship program attracting high-quality human resources to
work for the DoD; SMART has provided 1,419 scholarships, approximately 900
internships completed, and more than 1,000 scholars recruited into civilian work for the
DoD (LMI, n.d.). This program has collaborated with more than 200 sponsoring facilities
and more than 3,500 scholars, from pursuing degrees in key priority defense fields to
employment with the DoD (LMI, n.d.). Notably, in early 2024, five days after the NDIS
was released (January 16, 2024), the DoD announced the X-Force Fellowship program
for undergraduate students, graduate students, and recent graduates to have
opportunities to serve US by solving real national security problems such as hardware
design and prototyping, software development, data analysis and visualization,
technology reconnaissance, communications and marketing strategy, and defense policy
research in collaboration with DoD experts (More House, 2024). This strategy not only
helps nurture future generations of experts but also creates a direct talent pipeline from
educational institutions into the defense industry.
An equally important aspect in the NDIS is the focus on enhancing skills for the existing
workforce through specialized training programs on breakthrough technologies such as
artificial intelligence (AI), quantum computing, and cybersecurity (Vincent, 2024). These
pioneering technology fields not only shape the future of the defense industry but are
also key factors in maintaining the US strategic competitive advantage internationally.
Recent analysis reports from the DoD have indicated a concerning situation: “These
advanced technology fields are facing a serious shortage of highly specialized personnel,
particularly in the context of increasingly intense strategic competition with rival powers”
(Congressional Research Service, 2024). This shortage not only puts pressure on current
projects but also threatens the ability to develop and deploy advanced systems in the
future. The human resource development strategy in the NDIS extends far beyond
merely focusing on technical skills. It simultaneously emphasizes cultivating strategic
thinking and the ability to rapidly adapt to the constantly changing security environment.
In an era where threats develop at breakneck speed and are more diverse than ever
before, the creative thinking ability and rapid adaptability of defense human resources
become determining factors in the success of national security strategies. Therefore, the
DoD believes that the success of the NDIS depends greatly on the ability not only to
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
145
attract but also to retain exceptional talent in an extremely competitive environment with
the private sector, which often can offer more attractive compensation and more flexible
working environments (Industrial Base Policy, 2024). This is a significant challenge
requiring creative solutions in personnel policy, compensation mechanisms, and long-
term career development for specialists in the defense sector.
c) The Third Pillar: Reforming the Defense Procurement System
NDIS focuses on comprehensive reform of the defense procurement system-a key
element determining the adaptability and effectiveness of the entire national security
ecosystem. NDIS emphasizes the urgency of developing new procurement methods with
high flexibility, aimed at creating more responsive and dynamic capabilities while
maintaining a balance between important factors such as operational efficiency, long-
term maintenance capabilities, battlefield customization capacity, and compliance with
necessary standardization for defense support platforms and systems (Industrial Base
Policy, 2024). These flexible procurement models are expected to bring significant
improvements throughout the entire development and deployment cycle of defense
systems, focusing on substantially reducing the time from research to practical
deployment, optimizing overall costs, and enhancing production scalability when
necessary. Notably, NDIS also emphasizes designing systems with high interoperability
between the US and its strategic allies from the initial design phase, while carefully
considering factors related to potential future exportability (Alert, 2024). This strategy
reflects the US’ long-term vision in promoting international cooperation and enhancing
interoperability between allied forces, a factor becoming increasingly important in
modern military operations.
An important approach in NDIS is prioritizing procurement solutions based on
commercially available technology when conditions permit. This method not only aims to
promote innovation in the industry but also to significantly expand the supplier base for
the defense industry (Tabler, 2024). Effectively leveraging technologies and solutions
already developed and validated in the commercial market not only helps save significant
financial resources but also substantially shortens the time to operationalize new
systems-a factor of vital importance in today’s rapidly changing security environment.
To realize these ambitious objectives, the DoD is conducting a radical reform process
regarding traditional procurement procedures-which have frequently been criticized for
being cumbersome, inflexible, and no longer suitable for the pace of modern
technological development (Wong et al., 2024). The limitations of the current system
have been clearly reflected in the US Government Accountability Office (2024), which
points out that “the average time to develop and deploy a new weapons system-from
initial research to actual implementation-typically ranges from 7 to 10 years.” This
timeframe is too long and no longer appropriate in the context of the global security
environment changing at a dizzying pace, especially when strategic competitors are
continuously shortening their development cycles. To address these challenges, Ribeiro
(2024) has examined and analyzed the NDIS’s proposed series of synchronized reform
initiatives, including:
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
146
(1) Expanding and standardizing platform standards while enhancing interoperability
between different systems, facilitating rapid integration of new technologies and
minimizing dependence on specific suppliers.
(2) Strengthening rigorous technical requirements to limit “scope creep” - one of the
main causes of project delays and cost overruns in large-scale defense programs.
(3) Prioritizing readily available procurement solutions when tactically feasible and
reasonable, maximizing the use of technologies already proven in the commercial
market.
(4) Significantly improving DoD’s access to intellectual property rights and technical
data, enhancing efficiency in the procurement and maintenance of defense systems
throughout their operational lifecycle.
(5) Considering expanding and fundamentally reforming policies related to contract
strategy, facilitating the adoption of new models of cooperation between
government and the private sector.
(6) Continuing to promote procurement process reform initiatives, eliminating
unnecessary administrative barriers and optimizing decision-making processes.
(7) Comprehensively updating defense industry mobilization agencies and plans,
ensuring readiness to meet national security needs in all emergency situations.
These reforms reflect a turning point in the US approach to the defense procurement
system, shifting from the traditional rigid, sequential model to a significantly more
flexible, adaptive, and responsive system. This transformation not only aims to improve
efficiency and reduce costs but also ensures that US armed forces are always equipped
with the most advanced technologies in the shortest possible time, maintaining a
strategic competitive advantage in an increasingly complex and challenging global
security environment.
d) The Fourth Pillar: Building Economic Deterrence Capabilities and Promoting
International Cooperation
NDIS emphasizes the strategic importance of developing fair and effective competitive
market mechanisms to support the construction of a flexible DIB not only within the US
but also extending throughout the network of strategic allies and close partners globally
(Industrial Base Policy, 2024). The overall objective of this strategy is not simply to
enhance defense production capacity, but to establish an integrated economic security
system and comprehensive deterrence capability against countries identified as “hostile”
or potentially threatening to the security of the US and its allies. The focus of this
economic deterrence strategy is particularly aimed at the increasingly strong and deep
Russia-China alliance, especially after the Russia-Ukraine conflict erupted in 2022. The
strategic cooperative relationship between these two powers is not limited to the military
domain but extends to many other areas including technology, energy, and trade-forming
a multidimensional challenge to the national security interests of the US and its Western
allies. The US Deputy Secretary of Defense - Kathleen Hicks, has emphasized the
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
147
strategic importance of NDIS in building effective deterrence capabilities: “Developing
and empowering this modern defense industrial ecosystem is key to integrated
deterrence and building lasting advantages” (Department of Defense, 2023). This
statement reflects the profound recognition that in the modern world, deterrence
capability depends not only on pure military strength but also on the combined strength
of the entire economy and defense industrial ecosystem.
This strategy calls for a series of specific measures to strengthen economic-defense
cooperation between the US and its allies, including establishing new economic security
agreements and developing advanced mechanisms for technology sharing with partner
countries (US Department of Defense, 2024a). These economic and technological
constraints are not only intended to create direct economic benefits for the participating
parties but also to create a powerful deterrent effect by making potential “hostile”
countries face the prospect of being cut off from the international market system,
advanced technologies, and innovation centers of the US and its allies-a consequence
that could seriously damage their economic development and national security. In a
strategic statement, Deputy Secretary of Defense - Kathleen Hicks further clarified the
long-term vision and dual objectives of NDIS:
By aligning policies, investments, and activities internally and externally in a
manner appropriate to specific competitors, our industrial ecosystem can
enhance deterrence at maximum effectiveness. If deterrence fails, NDIS will
position our industrial ecosystem to provide our warriors with the necessary
capabilities-at the speed and scale-to defeat any nation attempting to harm
the security of the US, our allies, and our partners (Department of Defense,
2023).
This statement reflects the two-fold approach of the strategy: both enhancing deterrence
capabilities to prevent conflict before it begins and ensuring effective response capability
in case deterrence fails. Through promoting extensive economic cooperation with the
network of global allies and partners, the US not only creates an effective deterrence
mechanism but also significantly reduces dependence on countries with the potential to
cause tension or instability in providing critical defense-related materials and
technologies (National Defense Transportation Association, 2024). Additionally,
promoting economic-defense industrial cooperation with allies not only serves direct
security objectives but also contributes to enhancing the soft power of the US
internationally. The ability to create and maintain sustainable economic-defense alliances
not only brings direct material benefits but also creates profound geopolitical influence,
strengthening the US’ leadership position in the international system.
In general, NDIS represents a comprehensive strategic approach to strengthen defense
capabilities and enhance the competitive position of the US internationally. Through
building flexible supply chains, developing high-quality human resources, reforming the
procurement system, and promoting strategic economic partnerships, NDIS aims to
establish superior technological advantages, strong production capabilities, and economic
deterrence power against potential adversaries. This is a clear manifestation of the US’
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
148
determination to maintain its status as a military and economic superpower in the 21st
century.
3.2. Comprehensive Assessment of NDIS
NDIS represents a significant strategic advancement in the DoD’s multifaceted effort to
restructure and comprehensively modernize the DIB, aimed at responding promptly and
effectively to increasingly complex contemporary geopolitical challenges. In particular,
this strategy has been shaped and developed by the DoD in the context of escalating
security threats in both scale and nature due to China’s powerful rise with ambitions to
fundamentally change the current international order, the comprehensive Russia-Ukraine
conflict with far-reaching impacts on European security architecture, and the urgent need
to support Israel in addressing complex regional security threats, especially the conflict
with Hamas (US Department of Defense, 2024a). In-depth analysis of NDIS reveals
several notable strengths as well as limitations that need to be identified:
a) Strengths of NDIS
First, integrated and multidimensional strategic architecture: NDIS demonstrates an
innovative strategic vision by not merely addressing individual issues but establishing a
comprehensive and integrated systematic analytical framework, precisely identifying
structural challenges to the defense industry and proposing synchronized, highly
interconnected solutions. This strategy scientifically establishes four strategic priority
pillars, encompassing the entire defense industrial ecosystem from supply chains, high-
quality human resource development, procurement process improvements to enhanced
international cooperation, all aimed at building a highly adaptable, modern, and
sustainable defense industrial ecosystem. Notably, each strategic pillar has been
systematically concretized by DoD policymakers into 25 specialized activity areas with
specific objectives and clearly defined outputs, facilitating implementation and
effectiveness evaluation (Taylor, 2024). This structure reflects comprehensive strategic
thinking and a methodical approach to modernizing the DIB. Deeper analysis of the
strategic structure reveals that each pillar has been designed with a logical and balanced
architecture, including building flexible and highly resilient supply chains implemented
through eight specialized activity areas; developing high-quality human resources carried
out through five interconnected activity areas; comprehensive reform of the defense
procurement process divided into seven systematic activity areas; and strengthening
economic deterrence capabilities deployed through five specialized areas (Alert, 2024).
This integrated vision not only addresses short-term issues but also builds a solid
foundation for the long-term sustainable development of the defense industry, while
creating flexible mechanisms to adapt to unpredictable fluctuations in the global security
environment. This multidimensional and systematic approach has transcended the
framework of traditional defense industrial strategies, which often focus on individual
aspects while lacking an overall vision.
Second, strategic orientation promoting multinational cooperation: One of the
outstanding strengths of NDIS is its breakthrough approach in emphasizing the strategic
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
149
importance of transnational alliance cooperation in building integrated defense industrial
capabilities (Department of Defense, 2023). The strategy demonstrates profound and
practical recognition that the US cannot unilaterally maintain and develop a DIB with
sufficient capacity and scale to effectively respond to the increasingly complex global
security challenge landscape of the future. Exemplary multilateral cooperation initiatives
such as AUKUS and the “friend-shoring” model in building defense supply chains have
opened strategic opportunities for technology transfer and substantive cooperation
enhancement with strategic allied nations (Tabler, 2024). In particular, the AUKUS treaty
with its two main pillars-nuclear submarine development and advanced defense
technology cooperation-represents a breakthrough approach in sharing sensitive defense
technologies with trusted partners. NDIS therefore plays a pivotal role in the overall
foreign policy strategy of President Joe Biden’s administration, aimed at rebuilding
strategic trust and strengthening the global alliance network after the “America First”
period under President Trump-a policy that significantly diminished trust and cohesion
between the US and its traditional partners. This international cooperation aspect not
only helps reposition the global leadership role of the US but also creates practical
mechanisms for sharing the burden of technology development and defense production,
while enhancing the flexibility and resilience of the global defense supply chain against
geopolitical and economic shocks. The development of this defense industrial alliance
network also creates an important strategic competitive advantage for the US and its
partners in technological and economic competition with rival nations such as China and
Russia.
Third, balanced approach in optimizing public-private partnerships: NDIS has
demonstrated a multidimensional and balanced approach by acknowledging that the
federal government cannot unilaterally address complex challenges in the defense sector,
but requires synchronized mobilization and maximization of innovation potential and
expertise from the private sector (Department of Defense, 2023). This strategy proposes
building comprehensive public-private partnership models, not limited to financial
investment but extending to advanced scientific research and breakthrough technology
development. This multi-layered approach reflects deep and comprehensive awareness
that the radical restructuring of the defense industry requires synchronized, active, and
continuous coordination of both sectors within a long-term strategic framework. Private
businesses and corporations possess continuously updated specialized knowledge
repositories, rich practical experience, and diverse resources essential for effectively and
sustainably realizing NDIS’s ambitious objectives (Sax, 2024). This multidimensional
cooperation model allows for optimal synthesis and enhancement between the
government’s policy planning, strategic direction, and stable funding provision roles with
the private sector’s inherent continuous innovation capability, optimal operational
efficiency, and strong competitive drive (Howard, 2024). Particularly, NDIS has
developed a balanced analytical framework in identifying priority areas for public-private
cooperation, including: (a) Development of critical technologies such as artificial
intelligence, advanced microelectronics, and new energy sources; (b) Expansion of
production capacity in strategic areas such as precision ammunition, anti-aircraft
missiles, and unmanned systems; (c) Strengthening the resilience of the defense supply
chain; and (d) Developing high-quality human resources with specific skills necessary for
the modern defense industry. On this basis, this systematic strategic linkage will create
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
150
powerful synergistic effects, thereby accelerating the comprehensive modernization
process and significantly enhancing the competitiveness of the defense industry in an
increasingly complex and challenging global geopolitical context.
Fourth, specific and feasible implementation plan: NDIS does not stop at identifying
abstract strategic objectives and mere theory but has taken an important breakthrough
step with DoD officially announcing a detailed comprehensive implementation plan on
October 29, 2024, including a system of sequential, specific, interconnected deployment
steps and quantitative efficiency evaluation indicators for each phase (US Department of
Defense, 2024c). This strategic move demonstrates DoD’s strong, clear, and consistent
commitment to comprehensively recovering and synchronously enhancing the defense
industrial capabilities of the US and allied nations in the face of increasing and complex
challenges from the close Russia-China cooperation on a global scale. Undersecretary of
Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment William LaPlante has convincingly affirmed:
“The announcement of the National Defense Industrial Strategy marks a historic and
important milestone in the multifaceted effort to systematically scale up and significantly
enhance the resilience and resistance of the DIB in all situations” (Perez, 2024). This
detailed and comprehensive implementation plan will create a solid foundation for in-
depth and multidimensional analysis of potential weaknesses in complex supply chains,
strongly reinforcing cybersecurity systems throughout the defense industry sector, while
establishing and perfecting a strategic reserve system for critical materials and resources
using a scientific, systematic, and sustainable approach.
b) Limitations of NDIS
First, challenges regarding the sustainability of financial resources and budget allocation
priorities: The successful implementation of NDIS requires large-scale and continuous
investment over many years in both financial resources and high-quality human capital.
However, careful analysis reveals that the current strategic framework has not yet
established a detailed, comprehensive financial plan to ensure the necessary sustainable
funding, especially in the context of intense competition with many other spending
priorities in the federal budget structure. Maintaining a stable, adequately scaled, and
continuous funding stream across multiple budget cycles will be a systemic challenge for
the DoD. According to information from Laura Taylor-Kale: “The recently signed and
passed defense appropriation for fiscal year 2024 as well as the President’s budget
request for fiscal year 2025 includes billions of dollars for investment in supply chains
including ammunition, maritime strike capabilities, submarine industrial base
improvements and shipyards as well as workforce development initiatives” (US
Department of Defense, 2024b). This statement confirms that NDIS has been financially
secured for the 2024-2025 budget cycle; however, the sustainability of the budget
stream in subsequent phases remains a significant open question for the DoD,
particularly as pressure from budget constraints increases due to competition from
increasingly diverse and urgent domestic development priorities. Although details related
to specific budget allocation plans may not be widely disclosed due to the sensitive nature
of defense and national security, the absence of a clear long-term financial framework
remains a significant structural weakness in the overall architecture of NDIS.
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
151
Second, internal conflict between “Buy American” protectionist policies and the goal of
enhancing international cooperation: Although NDIS sets forth ambitions to promote
extensive international cooperation in the defense industry, this strategy faces significant
inherent barriers from “Buy American” protectionist policies-which prioritize domestic
sources-and the stringent regulatory system for controlling exports of sensitive military
technology. NDIS has acknowledged the challenges arising from complex US export
control mechanisms, including the International Traffic in Arms Regulations and Export
Administration Regulations (National Defense Transportation Association, 2024).
However, the perspective reflected in NDIS that “this acknowledgment is insufficient to
neutralize the negative impact on strategic cooperation efforts with international allies
and partners” (National Defense Transportation Association, 2024) still fails to address
the fundamental issue. In reality, the parallel existence of these two opposing policy
systems creates genuine barriers to the ability to share and transfer technology with
foreign partners-a key factor in building effective collective defense capabilities. The
notable lack of interest from EU allies, reflected through limited media coverage and
discussion about NDIS in mainstream European media channels, is clear evidence of the
negative impact of these protectionist policies on the potential for substantive
international cooperation (Taylor, 2024). Although NDIS has noted these challenges, the
strategic document has not yet proposed sufficiently strong and feasible solutions to
overcome existing legal and institutional barriers, creating a core weakness in the overall
structure of the strategy.
Third, systemic challenges related to competitiveness and technology innovation
transfer: NDIS has correctly identified structural challenges related to limited competition
in the defense industry ecosystem and the “valley of death” phenomenon in the transition
process from research to practical application for innovative technologies (Levantovscaia,
2024). The lack of substantive competition in the defense industry constitutes a structural
barrier to innovation processes and economic efficiency. This limited competitive
environment leads to the risk of forming monopolistic entities or those with few
competitors, thereby creating negative consequences such as high costs, inconsistent
product quality, and the absence of endogenous motivation for continuous improvement.
Simultaneously, the “valley of death” phenomenon accurately describes the situation
where advanced technologies encounter difficulties in bridging the gap between the
experimental research phase and large-scale deployment, primarily due to a lack of
effective commercialization mechanisms and necessary financial investment during this
critical transition phase. NDIS needs to propose more breakthrough and comprehensive
solutions to foster a healthy competitive environment and narrow the “valley of death”,
possibly through mechanisms such as encouraging supplier structure diversification or
establishing targeted investment funds to support the deployment process of innovative
technologies from laboratory to battlefield. If these structural challenges are not
systematically addressed, the risk of increasing innovation stagnation, low productivity,
and inefficient resource allocation will become increasingly serious. Unfortunately, the
current version of the strategy has not yet proposed specific, strong, and feasible
solutions to thoroughly address these core issues.
Fourth, lack of comparative strategic analysis with international competitors: An
important weakness in the structure of NDIS is its excessive focus on building and
developing US domestic defense industrial capabilities while significantly lacking strategic
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
152
comparative analyses with potential adversary nations such as China, Russia, North
Korea, Iran, and other competitor states (Handfield, 2024). In the contemporary
geopolitical context, US rival powers, especially China and Russia, are implementing
systematic efforts to significantly enhance their defense industrial capabilities. The
defense industrial development strategies of these countries, along with investment
trends, technological development trajectories, access to strategic material resources,
and global markets, will have direct and profound influences on the strategic competitive
environment that the US will face in the medium and long-term future. Without a
comprehensive comparative analysis and in-depth assessment of developmental
dynamics of competing rivals, NDIS will face significant difficulties in ensuring that its
priorities and action plans are built on accurately identifying the competitive challenge
context that the US needs to overcome. Adding strategic analyses of the capabilities and
defense industrial strategies of potential adversary nations would help NDIS improve the
foundation for making appropriate strategic decisions to maintain competitive advantage,
such as identifying priorities for developing key technological areas, strengthening
partnerships with specific allies, or making targeted investments in strategic production
capabilities. This comparative analysis becomes even more urgent in the context where
the US needs to ensure its defense industrial system maintains a superior position
compared to competitors to preserve its leading role in global defense.
c) Overall Assessment of NDIS
The US NDIS represents an important strategic advancement in efforts to
comprehensively restructure and modernize the defense industry. Developed in the
context of increasingly complex and multidimensional geopolitical challenges, NDIS’s
outstanding advantage is demonstrated through its systematic, comprehensive, and
multi-layered approach, going beyond short-term tactical vision to build a sustainable,
flexible, and highly adaptable defense industrial ecosystem in the face of global security
environment fluctuations. The most notable aspect of NDIS is the harmonious and
balanced combination between long-term strategic vision and specific implementation
steps that are highly feasible in the short term. The strategy not only provides a
theoretical framework for guidance but also delivers a detailed action roadmap with 25
specific activity areas systematically distributed across four main strategic pillars. In
particular, NDIS demonstrates profound strategic thinking by recognizing that US’s future
defense strength depends closely on the ability to mobilize and optimize comprehensive
resources from both public and private sectors while building a network of sustainable
and reliable alliance relationships on a global scale.
However, through comprehensive analysis, the US NDIS faces four core structural
challenges: (a) The complex problem of ensuring financial resources and long-term
budget sustainability; (b) Internal conflict between domestic defense industry
protectionist policies and the objective requirement for extensive international
cooperation; (c) Systemic barriers to promoting healthy competition and overcoming the
“valley of death” in the innovation technology transfer process; and (d) Significant
deficiency in comparative strategic analysis with key international competitors. If not
addressed systematically, comprehensively, and thoroughly, these structural limitations
could significantly diminish the feasibility and practical effectiveness of NDIS in its
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
153
mission to ensure national security and maintain the US’ leading defense technology
position in the context of global geopolitical competition that is increasingly intense in
magnitude and complex in nature. In the medium and long-term vision, the
comprehensive success of NDIS will depend greatly on the ability to maintain political
commitment throughout US presidential terms (a significant challenge due to the self-
adjusting mechanism of defense policy continuously reflecting differences in strategic
thinking between presidential administrations), as well as the ability to adapt flexibly and
promptly to rapid and unpredictable fluctuations in regional and global security
environments. NDIS is not simply an ordinary defense strategy but essentially a large-
scale restructuring project with a long-term vision, requiring synchronized, harmonious,
and effective coordination between government agencies, the private business sector,
and the international partner network to realize the strategic vision of a strong US DIB
with sufficient capacity to comprehensively respond to the diverse and complex
challenges of the 21st century.
Conclusion
NDIS marks a pivotal turning point in the US’ geostrategic response to multidimensional
security challenges within an increasingly unstable international order. This
comprehensive analysis reveals the NDIS as a sophisticated policy framework that
transcends conventional defense planning by establishing a cohesive quadrilateral
structure comprising four interrelated pillars: strengthening supply chain resilience,
developing human capital, enhancing procurement system efficiency, and expanding
international cooperation capabilities. The hallmark of this strategy lies in its systematic
integration of diverse policy dimensions into a unified strategic ecosystem designed to
effectively counter emerging threats from US’s strategic competitors and their allied
networks. However, the NDIS also faces significant structural limitations that may
undermine its long-term effectiveness. These include constraints on fiscal sustainability,
inherent tensions between protectionist inclinations and the imperatives of international
collaboration, barriers to innovation diffusion, and an insufficiently robust comparative
assessment of adversarial capabilities. These limitations constitute core vulnerabilities
that necessitate systematic remediation to ensure strategic coherence and operational
feasibility.
The NDIS reflects a strategic recognition by the US that maintaining technological
superiority in an evolving multipolar security environment requires the synchronized
mobilization of both public and private sector resources within a consistent strategic
framework. As geopolitical competition among great powers intensifies, the success of
the NDIS depends on sustained political commitment across successive administrations,
agile adaptation to dynamic threat landscapes, and effective navigation of complex
domestic and international constraints. Thus, the strategy is not merely a recalibration
of defense industrial policy, but a comprehensive restructuring of the US’ strategic
posture in response to profound transformations in the global security architecture. In
essence, the NDIS represents a deliberate effort to revitalize the “arsenal of democracy”
- the foundation of US strength that proved decisive in the world wars and the Cold War.
This strategy is aimed not only at safeguarding US hegemonic primacy but also at
unlocking new opportunities and confronting emerging challenges in the global defense
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
154
technology domain. By examining the core themes of the NDIS in this study, national
security policymakers can draw critical insights to formulate adaptive strategies,
reinforce defense capabilities, and contribute to regional and global stability and
sustainable development.
References
Alert, B. C. (2024). Department of Defense National Defense Industrial Strategy
Overview. https://www.bhfs.com/insights/alerts-articles/2024/department-of-defense-
national-defense-industrial-strategy-overview
American Economic Association (2024). DoD Releases First National Defense Industrial
Strategy (1.11.24). https://www.aeaweb.org/forum/4253/dod-releases-first-national-
defense-industrial-strategy-11
Congressional Research Service (2024). Emerging Military Technologies: Background and
Issues for Congress. https://sgp.fas.org/crs/natsec/R46458.pdf
Cook, C. (2024). Understanding the Contributions of the New National Defense Industrial
Strategy. https://www.csis.org/analysis/understanding-contributions-new-national-
defense-industrial-strategy
Department of Defense (2023). National Defense Industrial Strategy 2023.
https://www.businessdefense.gov/docs/ndis/2023-NDIS.pdf
Finacial Times (2024). The revival of the defence industry.
https://www.ft.com/content/8d21287f-d4cc-4b72-9872-9e3d766d56de
Gunter, J., & Legarda, H. (2024). China’s arms industry is increasingly global, but don’t
expect it to supplant NATO’s counterparts any time soon.
https://merics.org/en/tracker/chinas-arms-industry-increasingly-global-dont-expect-it-
supplant-natos-counterparts-any
Hamzawy, A. (2025). Ending the New Wars of Attrition: Opportunities for Collective
Regional Security in the Middle East.
https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/03/ending-the-new-wars-of-attrition-
opportunities-for-collective-regional-security-in-the-middle-east?lang=en
Handfield, R. (2024). Comparing the 2023 National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS):
A Critique and Comparison to Supply Chain Immunity. https://scm.ncsu.edu/scm-
articles/article/comparing-the-2023-national-defense-industrial-strategy-ndis-a-
critique-and-comparison-to-supply-chain-immunity
Howard, T. W. (2024). What Contractors Need to Know About DoD’s National Defense
Industrial Strategy. https://www.wiley.law/alert-What-Contractors-Need-to-Know-
About-DoDs-National-Defense-Industrial-Strategy
Indo - Pacific Defense Forum (2024). Chiến lược công nghiệp quốc phòng mới kêu gọi sự
hợp tác giữa Mỹ và các đối tác đồng minh [New defense industrial strategy calls for
cooperation between the US and allied partners].
https://ipdefenseforum.com/vi/2024/02/chien-luoc-cong-nghiep-quoc-phong-moi-keu-
goi-su-hop-tac-giua-hoa-ky-va-cac-doi-tac-dong-minh/
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
155
Industrial Base Policy (2024). The National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS).
https://www.businessdefense.gov/NDIS.html
Kapur, S. (2025). Trump’s budget proposes slashing health, education and clean energy
programs while talking up bigger military. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-
administration/trumps-budget-proposes-slashing-health-education-clean-energy-
programs-rcna204435
Kiet, L. H. & Hiep, T. X. (Eds.). (2025). Navigating Complex Geopolitical Landscapes
Amidst Conflict. New York: IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-8674-3
Kiet, L. H., Binh, N. T., & Hiep, T. X. (2024). From Arroyo to Duterte: Two Decades of
Philippines’ Foreign Policy Navigation between the US and China. Przegląd Strategiczny,
17, 133–150. https://doi.org/10.14746/ps.2024.1.9
Kiet, L. H., Binh, N. T., & Hiep, T. X. (2025). From border conflicts to maritime
competition: driving forces behind the power rivalry between India and China in the
Indian Ocean region. Australian Journal of Maritime & Ocean Affairs, 1–25.
https://doi.org/10.1080/18366503.2025.2492438
Levantovscaia, K. (2024). Reading between the lines of the new US National Defense
Industrial Strategy. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/reading-
between-the-lines-of-the-new-us-national-defense-industrial-strategy/
Levy, C., & Singhal, S. (2025). Navigating the new geopolitical uncertainty.
https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/geopolitics/our-insights/navigating-the-new-
geopolitical-uncertainty
LMI (n.d.). Project Spotlight: DoD SMART Scholarship-for-Service Program.
https://lmisolutions.com/blog/project-spotlight-dod-smart-scholarship-service-program
More House. (2024). U.S. Department of Defense - Summer Fellowship for All Majors.
https://careerdevelopment.morehouse.edu/blog/2024/01/16/u-s-department-of-
defense-summer-fellowship-for-all-majors/
National Defense Transportation Association (2024). The National Defense Industrial
Strategy: Enabling a Modern Defense Industrial Ecosystem.
https://www.ndtahq.com/the-national-defense-industrial-strategy-enabling-a-modern-
defense-industrial-ecosystem/
Perez, L. (2024). DoD Unveils NDIS Implementation Plan.
https://www.meritalk.com/articles/dod-unveils-ndis-implementation-plan/
Ribeiro, A. (2024). DoD releases NDIS document to coordinate and prioritize actions for
modernized defense industrial ecosystem. https://industrialcyber.co/critical-
infrastructure/dod-releases-ndis-document-to-coordinate-and-prioritize-actions-for-
modernized-defense-industrial-ecosystem/
Sax, C. (2024). Implementation Essential for Industrial Strategy.
https://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2024/2/21/implementation-
essential-for-industrial-strategy
JANUS.NET, e-journal of International Relations
e-ISSN: 1647-7251
VOL. 16, Nº. 2
November 2025-April 2026, pp. 137-156
Rebuilding the “Arsenal Of Democracy”: A Strategic Assessment of the United States National
Defense Industrial Strategy
Tran Bach Hieu, Le Hoang Kiet, Tran Xuan Hiep
156
Shinego, W. (2025). DoD talent chief aims to reform hiring to attract Gen Z.
https://www.afaccessionscenter.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/4034564/dod-
talent-chief-aims-to-reform-hiring-to-attract-gen-z/
Tabler, A. (2024). Inaugural National Defense Industrial Strategy Emphasizes
Cooperation Among Partner – Allies. https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/inaugural-
national-defense-industrial-6567888/
Taylor, T. (2024). The US National Defense Industrial Strategy: No Shortage of Ambition.
https://www.rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/us-national-
defense-industrial-strategy-no-shortage-ambition
US Department of Defense (2022). National Defense Strategy 2022.
https://media.defense.gov/2022/Oct/27/2003103845/-1/-1/1/2022-NATIONAL-
DEFENSE-STRATEGY-NPR-MDR.PDF
US Department of Defense (2024a). DoD Releases First Defense Industrial Strategy.
https://www.defense.gov/News/News-Stories/Article/Article/3644527/dod-releases-
first-defense-industrial-strategy/
US Department of Defense (2024b). DoD Official: Defense Industrial Strategy Already
Making Headway in Maritime Space. https://www.defense.gov/News/News-
Stories/Article/Article/3739030/dod-official-defense-industrial-strategy-already-
making-headway-in-maritime-spa/
US Department of Defense (2024c). DoD Releases National Defense Industrial Strategy
Implementation Plan.
https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3948653/dod-releases-
national-defense-industrial-strategy-implementation-plan/
US Government Accountability Office (2024). Weapon Systems Annual Assessment.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-24-106831.pdf
Vincent, B. (2022). DOD commits millions to expand Purdue-led program aimed at
growing microelectronics workforce. https://defensescoop.com/2022/09/27/dod-
commits-millions-to-expand-purdue-led-program-aimed-at-growing-microelectronics-
workforce/
Vincent, B. (2024). Tech, cyber prioritized in DoD’s new industrial base strategy.
https://defensescoop.com/2024/01/11/ndis-tech-cyber-prioritized-dod-industrial-base-
strategy/
White House (2025). Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Reforms Foreign Defense
Sales to Improve Speed and Accountability. https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-
sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-reforms-foreign-defense-sales-to-
improve-speed-and-accountability/
Wong, J. P., Younossi, O., Lacoste, C. K., Anton, P. S., Vick, A. J., Weichenberg, G., &
Whitmore, T. (2024). Improving Defense Acquisition.
https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RRA1600/RRA1670-
1/RAND_RRA1670-1.pdf
