US Secretary of War Pete Hegseth last week unveiled acquisition reforms representing an ambitious overhaul of Pentagon procurement. The reforms aim to fundamentally reshape how the military buys weapons by prioritizing speed over perfection, while also empowering acquisition leaders with greater flexibility and embracing commercial technology as the default option. These changes point in the right direction. Their ultimate impact will depend on implementation and speed—and on whether we can build the integrated, networked capabilities our warfighters need.
Nowhere is this transformation more urgent than to deter a fight in the Indo-Pacific. Beijing is racing to outproduce and outfield advanced systems across the region, leveraging a domestic defense industrial base that can surge at scale. The tyranny of distance, combined with China’s rapid buildup and stockpiling of munitions, means deterrence will hinge on how fast the United States and its allies can innovate, produce, and sustain operations across thousands of miles of contested ocean.
The proposed reforms Secretary Hegseth laid out are wide-ranging. Portfolio acquisition executives will replace traditional program executive offices, giving single officials accountability for interrelated programs with authority to shift resources based on performance. The Pentagon will embrace the “85% solution” and iterate toward perfection rather than waiting for the perfect system. A new Wartime Production Unit will negotiate deals with vendors across their entire Pentagon portfolio, creating new leverage and commercial contracting incentives.
These reforms overall will emphasize stabilizing demand signals and awarding companies “bigger, longer contracts for proven systems” and prioritizing “commercial solutions first.” They will also empower program leaders with the “control, expertise, and authority” to direct program outcomes and move money “to deliver on-time and under budget.” Regulatory reform was another facet, including removing “excessive testing oversight” and “regulations” that unnecessarily slow down government contracts.
The emphasis on speed was pronounced, noting that the new model will built on “speed, alignment, and action” with “problems driving the priorities of the department.” This includes the Pentagon’s highest priorities—from critical munitions to the Golden Dome missile defense initiative. These reforms aim to make the exception the rule and ensure that the top warfighting priorities are funded.
The true test will be execution. The shift to portfolio acquisition executives must be accompanied by genuine authority and protection from bureaucratic second-guessing. The reforms call for compensation tied to capability delivery time, competition, and mission outcomes, with acquisition officials held accountable for results. This accountability must cut both ways—protecting those who take smart risks and deliver results, while removing those who cling to process over progress.
How quickly can we materialize new weapon capabilities under this system? The answer depends on whether we truly embrace commercial timelines and technologies. The Pentagon will prioritize commercial solutions that can be purchased more quickly, accepting increased acquisition risk to decrease operational risk. Silicon Valley and the broader technology sector operate on innovation cycles measured in months, not decades, and in business commitments measured by real budgets. If these reforms genuinely enable the Pentagon to tap that velocity, we could see transformational capabilities fielded in months and years, rather than the current decades-long timelines.
That speed translates directly into deterrence, particularly with the need for distributed operations across vast distances. Hegseth’s speech rightly notes that “contested logistics is a key prioritized operational problem.” To ensure that this is properly funded, we must focus on acquisition and deployment of systems that are mobile, modular, and easily replenished, such as unmanned surface vessels, long-range munitions, adaptive basing kits, and resilient communications networks that can survive in a contested environment. Acquisition reform must deliver capabilities suited for that fight.
Perhaps most crucially, we need capabilities that can easily integrate across the joint force and with key allies and partners. The future battlefield demands a meshed network of sensors, shooters, and decision systems that work seamlessly across services, with allied forces, and between different contractors’ products. Building faster isn’t enough if the products of that effort can’t operate together. The next generation of strike, sensing, and command systems must be fielded as part of a joint, networked force—not as bespoke capabilities isolated by service or nation.
This is especially vital in the Indo-Pacific, where deterrence depends on a multidomain response and an integrated allied front. The decision to shift the Defense Security Cooperation Agency—which manages foreign military sales and trains allies on US equipment—from the Pentagon’s policy shop to its acquisition office promises to accelerate weapons sales to partners, addressing long timelines from ordering systems to delivery. Faster delivery means the Philippines, Japan, South Korea, and Australia can field compatible systems that operate as part of defensive web. Building this networked production base is as essential to deterrence as any new platform.
When combined with the emphasis on secure architectures and common standards, faster foreign military sales can enable truly integrated operations where allied systems work seamlessly together from day one.
Hegseth’s reforms evoke memories of an earlier transformation—when American industry forged the “Arsenal of Democracy” that won World War II. The Arsenal of Democracy succeeded not just because of individual factories or weapons systems, but because they formed an integrated whole—Liberty ships carrying tanks and aircraft that worked together in combined arms operations.
Today’s challenge is even more complex: we must forge an Arsenal of Freedom that spans oceans and nations, linking US industry and weapons producers with the factories and innovators of our Indo-Pacific allies. By uniting speed, jointness, and alliance integration, we can build that arsenal—and the deterrence—needed to keep the peace at home and in the Pacific.
PacNet commentaries and responses represent the views of the respective authors. Alternative viewpoints are always welcomed and encouraged.
Kimberly Lehn ([email protected]) is Senior Director of the Honolulu Defense Forum at Pacific Forum, and a national security professional with 20 years of experience in the US federal government and private sector focused on the Indo-Pacific region prior to joining the Forum.
Photo Credit via War on the Rocks