The need for an urgent and comprehensive review of defence strategy is clear, but there are legitimate concerns that the strategic framework for defence planning needs regular re-consideration. Political concerns often militate against this. Decisions around cuts in force structures, equipment programmes or infrastructure are rarely popular with the electorate and / or industry and have proved too easy to defer. Other countries have instituted regular SDRs or equivalent, on a defined timetable. For example in broadly the same time period since the UK's last comprehensive strategic review the US' quadrennial review process has led to reviews in 1997, 2001 and 2006, with a further review established for 201016. Arguably because the US is compelled to revisit these difficult questions regularly it is less a party political question than when governments are forced to make even more difficult, unpalatable decisions driven by crisis.
As noted above, another aspect of defence reviews subject to political "fudge" is the tendency to duck the need to properly cost the strategies that are proposed. This is particularly troublesome for long range affordability planning around the equipment programme and needs to be addressed in any future process proposal.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
16 Secretary of Defense has been mandated since 2001 to conduct a QDR "every four years, during a year evenly divisible by four" and to submit the report to Congress "not later than September 30 of the year in which the review is conducted"