The Insider

Rep. Randy Forbes (R-VA) this morning expressed his support for an "independent assessment" of the Air Force's proposed future force structure, an assessment already recommended by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Forbes, the chairman of the House Armed Services readiness subcommittee, said at a hearing on the Air Force's fiscal year 2013 force structure recommendations that he would be supportive of an independent panel. Though Forbes didn't mention it by name, the only such panel proposed so far is the Senate Armed Services Committee's "National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force," which -- if approved -- would report back to Congress in time for the fiscal year 2014 budget submission.

Forbes said he is in favor of implementing force structure changes that have broad support while seeking more information on the rest of the Air Force's proposals.

"Additional clarity on the requirements that support the overall force structure has been lacking for many years and is clearly warranted," he said in his opening statement.

Background information on the proposed commission is available in this Inside the Air Force piece from early June:

Senate Commission Could Lean On Internal Active-Reserve Analyses

The sector of the Air Force's strategic planning directorate that focuses on developing the right mix of active-duty, Guard and Reserve responsibility for individual mission areas has recently prepared analyses for several types of aircraft and is awaiting direction on how it can contribute to a commission proposed by the Senate Armed Services Committee.

In its fiscal year 2013 defense authorization bill, the Senate panel recommended creating a "National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force" to analyze the way the Air Force utilizes its active-duty, Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve components. That recommendation is in response to the service's FY-13 budget request, which proposed the retirement of hundreds of Air National Guard aircraft and has drawn intense criticism from members of Congress and state governors for its disproportionate impact on the Guard.

Highlights of the legislation were made public last month, but the full bill text and report were not released until June 5. That commission would be required to report to Congress by the end of March 2013, in time for lawmakers to consider any recommendations as they evaluate the Defense Department's FY-14 budget request. The House defense authorization bill, passed by the full chamber last month, did not include similar language, and House leadership has not publicly objected to the commission's creation.

The Air Force internally evaluates how it divides responsibility between the active and reserve components using its Total Force Enterprise (TFE) review process. The TFE division, a branch of the Air Force's strategic plans and programs directorate, conducts detailed analyses of the way operations should be divided between the components within particular mission areas, and those analyses -- once fused together -- could help inform the commission's work. The review process also helps inform service basing decisions and personnel assignments, including the implementation of active associations at various sites across the country.

In a June 6 interview at the Pentagon, Col. Eric Jorgensen, the TFE division's chief, explained to Inside the Air Force that over the past 30 years, the active-duty Air Force's manpower and inventory have decreased significantly. In contrast, the Guard and Reserve have remained stable in those areas, resulting in a heavy dependence on the reserve component. The FY-13 budget and other long-term plans are meant to orient the service slightly more heavily toward the active-duty force, he said.

Army Maj. Gen. Gregg Martin is the new president of the National Defense University, according to an NDU release.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gen. Martin Dempsey presided over the change of command ceremony at NDU, located at Ft. Lesley J. McNair in Washington.

From the release:

Major General Gregg F. Martin previously served as 48th Commandant of the Army War College from 2010-12.

A 1979 West Point graduate, he is a career engineer officer who has served globally in peace and war from Platoon Leader to Commanding General (CG).

As a company grade officer, he served from 1980-85 in the Cold War defense of Europe in the 94th and 79th Engineers, 18th Engineer Brigade. Following company command, he earned master’s degrees in Civil Engineering and Technology Policy at MIT from 1986-88.

After serving as a Recruiting and Admissions Officer at West Point from 1988-91, he earned a Masters in National Security Studies at the Naval War College, and also completed his Ph.D. at MIT in Engineering Management and Public Policy with a dissertation on strategic leadership and organizational change (1991-92).

At Fort Lewis, WA, from 1992-95, he served in I Corps and the 864th Engineers and deployed on a short tour with JTF-Bravo in Central America, conducting stability and humanitarian support operations.

Assigned to the Department of Social Sciences at West Point, he taught American Politics, International Relations and National Security Studies from 1995-97.

He commanded the Fightin’ 5th Engineer Battalion at Fort Leonard Wood, MO, from 1997-99, where his Sapper-Scouts supported the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment (Brave Rifles!).

After earning a Masters of Strategic Studies at the Army War College, he joined the faculty and taught leadership and management from 2000-02.

He commanded the 130th Engineer Brigade (Sappers In!), in support of V Corps and CJTF-7 from 2002-04, which included deploying the Brigade from Germany to Kuwait, the ground offensive from Kuwait to Baghdad, and leading a 13,000-man joint-multinational brigade during the first year of the Iraq War.

He then served as Deputy G-3/5/7, of 7th Army and US Army Europe from 2004-05.

Next he served as CG of the Northwest Division, Army Corps of Engineers from 2005-07, which included civil works, disaster response, military construction and environmental programs across a 12-state region from Washington to Missouri, as well as service on the Mississippi River Commission as a Presidential appointee.

From 2007-08, he served as Commandant of the US Army Engineer School and Regiment, and then as CG of the US Army Maneuver Support Center of Excellence and Fort Leonard Wood, from 2008-10, educating, training and developing leaders; as well as capability and force development.

He deployed to Kuwait in January 2010 where he served as Deputy CG of 3rd Army and U.S. Army Central in support of operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, and throughout the CENTCOM AOR.

The Congressional Research Service has issued a report on "Conventional Prompt Global Strike and Long-Range Ballistic Missiles," obtained first by Secrecy News.

Some highlights:

Some have argued that the possible crisis instabilities associated with long-range ballistic missiles should not eliminate them from consideration for the PGS mission because the United States can work with Russia, China, and other nations to reduce the risks; also because no other weapons, at least in the short term, provide the United States with the ability to attack promptly anywhere on he globe at the start of an unexpected conflict. Yet the question of whether the United States should accept the risks associated with the potential for misunderstandings and crisis instabilities can be viewed with a broader perspective. How likely is the United States to face the need to attack quickly at great distances at the start of an unexpected conflict? How much would the United States lose if it had to wait a few hours or days to move its forces into the region (or to await the intelligence reports and precise targeting data needed for an attack)?

If the risks of waiting for bombers or sea-based weapons to arrive in the theater are high, then long-range ballistic missiles may be the preferred response, even with the risk that other nations might misunderstand U.S. intentions. On the other hand, if the risks of waiting for other forces to arrive in theater are deemed to be manageable, and the risks of potential misunderstandings and crisis instabilities associated with the launch of long-range ballistic missiles are thought to be high, then the United States can consider a broader range of alternative weapons systems to meet the needs of the PGS mission.

U.S. Cyber Command chief Gen. Keith Alexander expressed concern today that cyber attacks will soon move from disruptive to destructive in nature, warning that the United States must be prepared for them. Speaking at an AEI event on cybersecurity, Alexander, who also heads the National Security Agency, emphasized that now -- before a crisis, when decision-makers have the time and ability to get it right -- is the time to act.

Other highlights from Alexander's remarks:

• New legislation on cyber issues, he said, is “vital." Without commenting on specific legislation, Alexander said that information sharing must be included; that U.S. citizens must be made aware that the government does not intend to violate their civil liberties and privacy; and that standards and rules are key, but controversial. Alexander added that he has discussed the issue with both Democrats and Republicans, but noted the political challenges in passing any legislation.
• Cyber threats, collectively, are a tougher issue to tackle than nuclear deterrence during the Cold War, he said, because there are five different types of cyber actors: nation-states, cybercriminals, hackers, hacktivists and terrorists.
• Al Qaeda is not a viable cyber threat today, but could become one in the future because exploiting networks is fairly easy.
• Addressing cyber issues is a "team sport" involving other agencies. The White House, he said, has led the effort to bring a team together, which includes the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI.
• DOD must be involved in building a defensive architecture, and even a thin, virtual cloud infrastructure is more defensible than what exists now. DOD also needs a trained and ready cyber team and better situational awareness, Alexander said.
• China and the U.S. must find a way forward given that the two countries have the largest numbers of computers and related devices.

The Farnborough Air Show kicks off on Monday just outside London and the Defense Department will be represented. Senior DOD officials will make presentations and U.S. military aircraft will conduct aerial demonstrations at the week-long event, according to a Pentagon statement, which adds:

Various models of U.S. military aircraft and equipment and approximately 100 aircrew and support personnel from military bases in Europe and the U.S. are scheduled to attend. Platforms include: the Army LUH-72 Lakota helicopter and ScanEagle unmanned aerial vehicle; Navy F/A-18F Super Hornet and P-3C Orion; the Marine Corps MV-22B Osprey; and several Air Force aircraft including the F-16C Fighting Falcon, C-130J Super Hercules, C-17A Globemaster III, F-15E Strike Eagle, and B-52 Stratofortress.

Participation in the biennial airshow highlights the strength of the U.S. commitment to the security of Europe and demonstrates the contributions the U.S. defense industry offers with various state-of-the-art capabilities vital for the support and protection of our allies' and partners' national-security interests.

The Senate Armed Services Committee's fiscal year 2013 defense authorization bill would cost $634 billion, according to a Congressional Budget Office analysis released yesterday:

That total includes an estimated $89 billion for the cost of overseas contingency operations, primarily in Afghanistan. In addition, S. 3254 would prescribe personnel strengths for each active-duty and selected-reserve component of the U.S. armed forces. CBO estimates that appropriation of the authorized amounts would result in outlays of $622 billion over the 2013-2017 period.

The bill also contains provisions that would increase or decrease costs of discretionary defense programs in 2014 and future years. Those implicit authorizations would affect force structure, DoD compensation and benefits, DoD’s use of multiyear procurement authority, and other programs and activities. CBO has analyzed the costs of a select number of those authorizations and we estimate they would raise net costs by about $42 billion over the 2014-2017 period, assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts for those years. Those amounts are not included in the totals in the previous paragraph because funding for those activities would be covered by specific authorizations in future years.

S. 3254 contains provisions that would decrease direct spending by $31 million over the 2013-2017 period and $75 million over the 2013-2022 period. Because enacting the legislation would affect direct spending, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. Enacting the bill would not affect revenues.

U.S. and Romanian defense officials have signed "implementing arrangements" related to the planned construction and operation of the Aegis Ashore missile defense facility, according to a U.S. European Command statement issued today.

Romanian State Secretary for Defense Policy and Planning Sebastian Hulaban and Air Force Maj. Gen. Mark Schissler, director of plans and policy at EUCOM, "signed two implementing arrangements and three amendments to existing implementing arrangements related to the construction and operation of the planned missile defense facility in Deveselu," the command statement reads. It further states:

One implementing arrangement is for the use of land areas surrounding Deveselu Base, which is located near Caracal, Romania. The other implementing arrangement is for the use of airspace over Deveselu Base.

The two governments also signed three amendments to existing implementing arrangements regarding security, real estate and the functioning of the joint committee.  Each of these implementing arrangements supports Phase II of the European Phased Adaptive Approach.

The Ballistic Missile Defense Agreement between U.S. and Romania was signed Sept 13, 2011 and entered into force on Dec. 23, 2011.

The signing of these implementing arrangements is another step forward toward making the missile defense facility in Deveselu a reality.

Rear Admiral Randall M. Hendrickson, the Deputy Director of the Missile Defense Agency, and Brigadier General Thomas J. Sharpy, Director of Plans, Programs and Analyses, U.S. Air Forces in Europe, also attended the signing.