Despite the absence of scientific support for a tripartite alliance in
defense policymaking, political scientists and the general public con
tinue to subscribe to a subgovernment explanation. This article addres
ses the subgovernment dilemma as it applies to the area of weapons pro
curement. More precisely, it asks whether the subgovernment model accu
rately describes and adequately explains the decisions to develop and
build major weapons systems. In answering this question, the critical
assumptions or propositions that comprise the model are tested, relyin
g upon published research and original data drawn from 19 cases of mil
itary hardware decisions. The findings do lend some qualified support
for a military subgovernment.