Is President Donald Trump an ally to the defense industry or a problem? I can't decide. 

At the very least you might call the relationship complicated. The defense industry has applauded his calls for a defense buildup since the campaign. But companies also saw him blast program costs via Twitter, which led stocks to tumble and defense juggernauts to scramble to reassure investors and customers, all while trying to not alienate the president. Out of that came White House meetings between top executives and the president and cost reductions on programs that may or may not have had anything to do with his critiques.

Aside perhaps from talk of a defense buildup, none of this was typical. And now Trump and defense executives are praising the positive results that came of their productive conversations. 

This much is true – he's interacting directly with the market in a way that has often made other administrations a little skittish. He's visiting facilities, he's talking openly about the dialogues with executives, he's praising progress made. He casually references "Marillyn" as if she was the person who does his taxes, not the CEO of the world's biggest defense company. 

He's not keeping these companies or their leaders at arms length, in fear of being accused of bowing to big business. That also is not typical. As is quite true about most everything Trump does, he's not acting like a politician. You might say he's acting like a businessman – using rather shrewd tactics to force the best deal his money (America's money) can buy. That's what he's crediting himself for doing at least, and what Lockheed's Hewson said in my interview with her. This is his comfort zone. And executives are more than willing to credit him for a job well done. It is, after all, in their best interest to do so. 

So is this the new standard? Consider what he's focused on thus far: The F-35 and Air Force One, two programs that are widely known to be among the pricier programs in the defense portfolio, that bring with them unusual awareness among the American public, and that kicked off in prior administration.  

What did he have to lose?

What will be interesting to watch is how, or if, Trump inserts himself in a similar fashion into programs that kick off during his administration. Their success or failure, whether they are lauded or deemed poster children for procurement run amok, will be attached to his tenure. Perhaps that will spur him to be as involved, within the bounds of the law. Or he might opt to keep quiet – leaving program planning to the Pentagon, spending approvals to the Hill, and oversight to the watchdog agencies, while he chimed in during closed door meetings. 

That's generally been the way for past administrations. Even as the F-35 earned loads of criticism from watchdog agencies and the Hill for costs, Obama kept rather mum. The most prominent advocacy for a given program from a president typically filters by way of a his budget proposal.

Now, we have heard Trump advocate for a Navy fleet expansion, for 350 ships. But with the Navy calling for 355, he's rather insolated from the consequence of any subsequent Navy buildup falling on him exclusively. He could claim himself to be conservative by comparison to service demands. It's a rather safe place to be. That said, he did call for an additional carrier – something he might need to own eventually. We'll see if he does. 

Remaining mum hasn't appeared to be Trump's way. But much can change for programs that roll out on his watch.

About Jill Aitoro

Jill Aitoro is editor of Defense News. She is also executive editor of Sightline Media's Business-to-Government group, including Defense News, C4ISRNET, Federal Times and Fifth Domain. She brings over 15 years’ experience in editing and reporting on defense and federal programs, policy, procurement, and technology.

Share:
More In Commentary