Funding National Security Central to the shift in government of the armed forces. In addition, necessary outlook prescribed above is the need to procedures should be taken as outlined start exploring the possibility that there above to fix the acquisition system, are potentially other sources and means to rebalance compensation for service generate funds for the tremendous members, and pass legislations that aim to demands of national security. Funding our create new wealth and strengthen human credible deterrence capability will end the and materiel resources. era of strategic drift that failed to effectively manage safety and security risks. Decades of inaction have led to devastating consequences to internal security and have undermined our ability to adequately prepare for external defense in the future. Keeping defense spending low to save money is a spurious conjecture; it simply pushes expenses for maintenance, training, and capital stock into the future, and at the expense of the country’s security and well-being. The above requires a dynamic and collaborative mix of executive and legislative actions, with support from our policymakers and economic managers. In support of our defense modernization, the government has to allocate at least 2 percent of the GDP as the minimum annual budget for the defense sector in order to elevate ourselves from the (near) bottom position and quickly catch up with our ASEAN neighbors, and fully exercise our sovereignty. Myanmar, whose GDP There is a need to increase the size per capita is smaller than the Philippines, and deterrent capability of the Navy and allocated 4.8% of GDP (2016) for military the Air Force as quickly as possible to expenditure (SIPRI). serve as our external defense, protect our national territory and Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), and modernize all branches [34