NATSEC Roundtable No. 10: The Forges Went Dark

Key Takeaways

• Defense spending shifted from commercial firms to specialists since 1990s.
• Dual-use manufacturers can boost innovation and speed for Pentagon contracts.
• Anatar builds AI‑orchestrated domestic apparel line integrated with DoD institutes.
• New Balance, Carhartt, YETI ready for defense textile procurement.
• Procurement reform must cut compliance costs and shorten award timelines.

Summary

The recent NATSEC roundtable highlighted how U.S. defense acquisition has moved from a broad commercial industrial base to a narrow set of specialist contractors, eroding innovation. Authors of *Mobilize* argue that reviving dual‑use manufacturers—companies that serve both consumer and military markets—could restore agility, citing examples like Anatar’s AI‑driven domestic apparel plant linked to DoD innovation institutes. The article lists several consumer brands (New Balance, Carhartt, YETI, etc.) that already possess the manufacturing discipline to become defense suppliers if procurement barriers are eased. It calls for policy changes to lower compliance costs and accelerate contract cycles.

Pulse Analysis

The United States once leveraged a versatile commercial industrial base to dominate both consumer markets and wartime production. From the 1940s through the Cold War, companies like Chrysler and Ford built tanks and aircraft engines alongside automobiles, keeping manufacturing processes sharp through constant market competition. When the Soviet Union collapsed, defense procurement rationalized around a handful of specialist contractors, stripping away that dual‑use dynamism and leaving the Pentagon dependent on firms with limited commercial pressure to innovate.

Today, a new generation of domestic manufacturers is quietly re‑creating that dual‑use model. Anatar’s Georgia facility uses an AI‑orchestrated Loom OS platform to automate apparel production, while simultaneously participating in DoD‑funded manufacturing innovation institutes. Brands such as New Balance, Carhartt, YETI, Goruck, and Filson already meet the rigorous standards demanded by military logistics, yet they remain sidelined by procurement rules that favor entrenched defense contractors. Their existing supply chains, quality controls, and American‑made credentials position them to supply everything from durable footwear to temperature‑controlled containers for forward operating bases.

The strategic implication is clear: without reform, the United States risks ceding industrial advantage to rivals like China, which has deliberately built a flexible manufacturing ecosystem. Policymakers must simplify compliance, shorten award timelines, and align contract structures with commercial operating models. Doing so would unleash a wave of innovation, reduce costs, and re‑integrate the civilian and defense economies that historically powered American economic and military supremacy. The forges can be lit again—if the procurement system moves fast enough.