The Insider

By Amanda Palleschi
September 20, 2010 at 5:35 PM

An increasing number of complex issues on the global agenda is outpacing the ability of international organizations and national governments to address them, according to a report released today by the U.S. National Intelligence Council and the European Union's Institute for Security Studies.

The report concludes that global governance "is at a critical juncture," calling for "more effective global governance" to address threats like "ethnic conflicts, infectious disease, and terrorism as well as a new generation of global challenges including climate change, energy security, food and water scarcity, international migration flows and new technologies."

The report, "Global Governance 2025," is a follow-on to the NIC's 2008 report, "Global Trends 2008." It is the first joint, unclassified report developed between the National Intelligence Council and a non-U.S. organization, and involved consultations with government officials, media representatives, business, academic, NGO and think tank leaders in developed countries around the world.

According to the report, the "shift to a multipolar world, particularly the shift in power toward nonstate actors," complicates the prospects for effective global governance over the next 15 years, “making more effective global governance critical to addressing global problems.

The authors of the report note that global governance is often "seen as a Western concept," but multilateral institutions are critical because of their ability to "deliver public goods that summits, nonstate actors, and regional frameworks cannot supply . . . multiple and diverse governance frameworks, however flexible, probably are not going to be sufficient to keep pace with the looming number of transnational and global challenges absent extensive institutional reforms and innovations."

The report includes hypothetical scenarios that illustrate potential trajectories of the international system as it confronts global challenges over the next 15 years.

By John Liang
September 20, 2010 at 3:34 PM

From now through the end of October, Marines at Camp Pendleton, CA, are checking out a U.S. Joint Forces Command interactive training simulation that closely simulates battlefield conditions, according to a JFCOM statement released this morning:

The Future Immersive Training Environment (FITE), one of USJFCOM's joint capability technology demonstrations (JCTD), is a virtual reality-based training system to improve team decision-making skills through realistic scenarios that challenge warfighters to read and react to situations and signals they may encounter on the battlefield.

Jay Reist, FITE's operational manager, said it provides warfighters and their trainers with an immersive training environment that emphasizes complex tactical and decision-making skills, while viewing their stress levels and gauging their reactions to different scenarios.

"FITE demonstrates the art of the possible. It creates a mixed reality capability for squad-level training, working with interactive technologies appropriately within a realistic scenario that has been developed by subject matter experts based on real events seen in an operating environment," Reist said. "The results will be delivered to the services, which will make a determination to include the capabilities into their programs of record."

He called the FITE effort a department-wide undertaking to make warfighters' first firefight no worse than their last simulation.

"From the USJFCOM perspective, we sought to ensure collaboration took place. We have had participation from all the services, the Joint Staff, the Office of Naval Research (ONR), U.S. Special Operations Command, the Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization, the DoD, industry partners that have been eager to be a part of something like this, and academia that has been studying human performance under stressful conditions and wanted to be involved from the beginning," Reist said.

As Inside the Pentagon reported in April:

The Pentagon is making advances in virtual-reality training featuring avatar representations of troops and simulating the realistic sights and sounds of battle to bolster decision-making skills and the cohesion of units heading to Afghanistan, according to officials involved in the programs.

U.S. Joint Forces Command's Future Immersive Training Environment (FITE) program provides instructors and participants with an interactive realm emphasizing complex tactical and decision-making prowess. The technology manager is the Office of Naval Research.

FITE is a two-year joint capability technology demonstration program supporting the related virtual-reality work of all the services, according to Jay Reist, the program's operational manager. JFCOM has been working on the technology for about 19 months.

Under this initiative, JFCOM is developing a prototype incorporating hardware that consists of an "individually-worn body computer," a helmet-mounted display, a "realistic, replicated weapon system, and an instantaneous feedback vest," Reist told Inside the Pentagon. A software capability providing the "virtual world" allows all training participants to interact with one another, he said.

Once soldiers don the head-mounted display, they see a depiction of the operational environment -- in this case a village in Afghanistan -- that is similar to a high-end video game like Halo or Doom, he explained. It is accompanied by digital people, terrain and buildings.

JFCOM finished the first phase of the program two weeks ago with the help of Marines at Camp Lejeune, NC, and soldiers at Ft. Benning, GA, Reist said. The command is undertaking "detailed planning" this week to prepare for September's next spiral, which is a "facility-based, mixed-reality capability," Reist said.

This second stage will bring in animatronics or robotic characters like Disney World's Pirates of the Caribbean, as well as sophisticated, 3D capabilities, he said. It will be coupled with a live environment featuring "real role players and live entities, all within a full stereo/audio capability . . . [and which have] all the sights and sounds and smells" of a real operation, Reist said. The role players will be projected onto screens as avatars. No live fire will be involved.

By Jason Sherman
September 17, 2010 at 8:25 PM

Pratt & Whitney, the maker of the primary Joint Strike Fighter engine, may have jumped the gun in its eagerness to spin the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee's mark of the FY-11 Pentagon spending bill.

On Tuesday, when the the subcommittee issued a sparse summary of its recommendation for a FY-11 Pentagon budget that was silent on the matter of the F136 JSF alternate engine, P&W spokeswoman Erin Dick blasted out a statement to reporters praising the committee for not funding the F136, which she claimed was an endorsement of the Obama administration's position to veto any bill that adds new funds for the program. She said:

This Senate action is a clear message that the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee for Defense supports President Obama and Secretary Gates in their position that funding an alternate engine will not save taxpayer's money or improve military readiness in any way.

On Thursday, however, the full Senate Appropriations Committee outlined more fully its position on the F136 in the report accompanying its bill calling it an award-winning, “near-model program.”

Far from slamming the door on the F136 program, as the Pratt & Whitney release suggested, the committee, according to sources on Capitol Hill and defense analysts, may have instead signaled that it might support FY-11 funding for the JSF alternate engine during an upcoming conference with House appropriators who have backed the F136 in their version of the bill.

While the Senate panel did not fund the F136, its report included language that was very supportive of the JSF alternate engine development effort.

The panel's report asserts that F136 engine development is “on track,” with the “program being awarded 17 straight performance awards in the past eight years with an average approval rating of 93.5 percent” -- a track record amassed as the development of the JSF airframe has “seen cost increases and significant delays.”

The incongruence of the insistence on canceling the second engine program which is a near-model program and which most analysts expect would curtail long-term costs of the entire JSF program with equal insistence on the need to fully fund the JSF program is hard to rationalize.

Pratt & Whitney is not exactly an objective observer on this issue. If the F136 engine program -- under development by rivals General Electric and Rolls Royce -- is successfully terminated, Pratt & Whitney will have a lock on as much as $100 billion worth of engine business over the life of the JSF program.

Asked about her Tuesday statement in light of the committee's full report, Dick today told InsideDefense.com she stands by her statement.

By Tony Bertuca
September 17, 2010 at 8:03 PM

EL PASO, TX, -- Officials from the Army, the Pentagon and the Government Accountability Office converged at White Sands Missile Range, NM, today to conduct the limited user test of the Early Infantry Brigade Combat Team, a suite of "spin-out" technologies left over from the canceled Future Combat System.

The test was scheduled to include the Network Integration Kit, the Small Unmanned Ground Vehicle, the Class 1 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle and two varieties of Unattended Ground Sensors.

Army spokesman Paul Mehney said the test would also involve pulling other elements of the service's network plan together, including the use of aerostats and the Joint Tactical Radio System Ground Mobile Radio.

E-IBCT has been criticized by some members of Congress and officials from the Pentagon after a poor performance during a 2009 LUT. The Army, however, has asserted that E-IBCT has improved dramatically over the span of one year, and service officials have predicted a far more successful test this time around.

Test results were not yet available this afternoon. “It's like an election; the results are still coming in,” said Col. Steve Duke of the Army's Operational Test Command.

Spc. Conrad Slater, a soldier testing the equipment here, said he finds Tactical Unattended Ground Sensors useful but would prefer that they transmit video as opposed to still images. “Right now, you're either catching the tail of something or the front of something,” he told a reporter.

In recent weeks, Army leaders have increasingly pointed to the development of the network as the service's top priority.

Check back to InsideDefense.com next week for more.

By Pat Host
September 17, 2010 at 3:57 PM

The European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co.'s defense and security division is being rebranded Cassidian as part of the company's 10th anniversary.

The Netherlands-based EADS is also reinforcing itself as the "umbrella brand" of its four divisions with a common visual identity: Airbus, Eurocopter, Astrium and Cassidian. Airbus produces aircraft, Eurocopter produces helicopters and Astrium provides civil and defense space systems and services.

"This brand renovation embodies exactly the spirit of Vision 2020, our strategy for EADS' next ten years: Reinforce each of the four divisions, give them the visibility they need to market their business and at the same time materialize the strength and unity of the group," said EADS CEO Louis Gallois in a company statement.

EADS is also modernizing its logo and branding scheme as part of its 10th anniversary.

By John Liang
September 16, 2010 at 9:20 PM

The Senate Appropriations Committee is proposing a $425 million funding reduction for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System, according to the report released today that accompanies the committee's fiscal year 2011 defense spending bill.

"The committee is aware that due to several issues, in particular the Laser Initiated Ordnance System (LIOS) and microcracks in the Heat Shield, THAAD production is about one year behind schedule," the report states, commending the Missile Defense Agency and Office of the Secretary of Defense "for delaying the production decision until the missile has been thoroughly evaluated.

"Due to the production delay, the committee recommends a reduction of $425 million in fiscal year 2011 and directs MDA to keep the congressional defense committees informed on the progress of THAAD production and any schedule changes for outfitting the Army's THAAD batteries as a result of the production delay," the report continues.

By Jason Sherman
September 16, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Reps. Robert Andrews (D-NJ) and K. Michael Conway (R-TX), the chairman and ranking member of the House Armed Services Committee's acquisition reform panel, are urging colleagues to support funding in the Pentagon's FY-11 budget for the F136 engine, the alternate Joint Strike Fighter propulsion package.

Backed by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who believes the alternate engine is an example of wasteful DOD spending,

Still, the lawmakers argue there are sound public policy reasons to support continued development of the engine, built by a General Electric/Rolls Royce industry team.

Citing the recommendations of the Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel, as well as former Pentagon Acquisition Executive Jacques Gansler's views, as expressed recently to Inside the Pentagon's Amanda Palleschi, the lawmakers “strongly encourage your support for the Joint Strike Fighter competitive engine program.”

Competition is precisely what we need today for the $100 billion JSF engine program. Funding for the engine is already 75 percent complete. Let's complete the program, allow real engine competition to occur and enjoy the benefits that will result.

By John Liang
September 16, 2010 at 7:10 PM

The Senate Appropriations Committee just finished marking up the $669.9 billion fiscal year 2011 defense spending bill and approved it by a party-line 18-12 vote. The total is $8.3 billion less than what the Obama administration is asking for.

The defense subcommittee approved the bill on Sept. 14. The $669.9 billion in the Senate bill includes $157.7 billion for the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and counterterrorism efforts worldwide.

The House Appropriations defense subcommittee approved a $670.9 billion bill on July 22, $7.2 less than what the administration wanted, but the full committee has not yet approved the legislation.

By Jason Sherman
September 16, 2010 at 3:19 PM

Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, today is touting a new GAO assessment that could complicate Defense Secretary Robert Gates' bid to halt funding for the Joint Strike Fighter alternate engine, a program Gates believes is an example of wasteful DOD spending but one that many supporters in Congress argue is pivotal to sound acquisition policy.

The Michigan lawmaker today issued a statement reacting to the GAO finding, made public yesterday, stating that DOD's estimate of an additional $2.9 billion and six years needed to complete development of the F136 engine “could be lower.” Our coverage of that assessment is here.

Specifically, Levin said, the findings in the report “add to economic arguments in favor of competition.”

But economic benefits “are not the only argument in favor of competition,” he added:

That is why I strongly supported enactment of the Weapons System Acquisition Reform Act of 2009 (WSARA), which, among its main directions to the Defense Department, calls for competition throughout the life cycle of major acquisition programs.  Since the JSF program is the single largest DOD acquisition program, the JSF engine is a great place to begin implementing WSARA.

By Jason Sherman
September 15, 2010 at 9:03 PM

Sen. Jim Webb (D-VA) today announced plans to introduce legislation to “freeze action” on Defense Secretary Robert Gates' bid to eliminate the Virginia-based U.S. Joint Forces Command. Webb, who earlier this month announced plans for a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on JFCOM and other DOD efficiencies, issued a press release today, stating:

Today I have again called on the White House to refrain from making a final decision on the future of the U.S. Joint Forces Command until Congress has satisfactorily obtained a firm understanding of the process by which Secretary of Defense Gates arrived at his recommendation.

A decision of this magnitude poses significant implications for joint training and the development of joint war-fighting capabilities that are essential for successful 21st-century combat operations.  Any proposal to close or realign the command should be guided by a clear process and analytical basis that everyone can understand.  This is particularly important in light of Secretary Gates’s stated intention to consider consolidating or closing other military bases and facilities across the country.

In addition to the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing now promised to address the full range of the proposed defense efficiency initiatives, I will be introducing legislation to require the Secretary of Defense to provide full justification to Congress before any action is taken to close the Joint Forces Command.  This is fully consistent with Congress’s constitutional oversight responsibility as we work to improve our military’s joint warfare capabilities and operations.

Last month, Webb and other members of the Virginia delegation challenged the legal basis of Gates' recommendation to close JFCOM, urging the defense secretary to reconsider and “conduct a more complete review of JFCOM’s mission and activities without a predisposed intent to close the command.”

By John Liang
September 15, 2010 at 7:00 PM

Army Gen. Carter Ham has been nominated to become the next head of U.S. Africa Command, according to a Pentagon statement released this afternoon. Ham, the commanding general of U.S. Army Europe and Seventh Army in Germany, would replace AFRICOM's first-ever commander, Army Gen. William "Kip" Ward.

According to Ham's biography, the general has served as the deputy director for regional operations on the Joint Staff. Ham assumed command of the 1st Infantry Division at Ft. Riley, Kan. in August 2006 and served there until July 2007, when he was again assigned to the Joint Staff as director for operations, J3.

Ham began his Army service as an enlisted infantryman in the 82nd Airborne Division before attending John Carroll University in Cleveland, OH, according to the bio, and was commissioned in the Infantry as a Distinguished Military Graduate in 1976.

No word yet on what Ward's next assignment will be.

By Marcus Weisgerber
September 15, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Pentagon acquisition executive Ashton Carter said the Defense Department plans to wrap up source selection of the Air Force's next-generation aerial refueling tanker this fall, but had not set a specific date.

As acquisition officials review KC-X proposals from Boeing and EADS, they have not set a specific date for selecting a winner, Carter said during a speech at an Air Force Association-sponsored conference in National Harbor, MD.

"It'll be done when it's done," Carter said. "Anyone that gives you a specific date doesn't know what they're talking about."

By John Liang
September 15, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Sen. Richard Shelby (R-AL) just released a statement on a World Trade Organization ruling where he contends the WTO "confirmed that Boeing has in fact received subsides for aircraft development." The senator, whose state would host a facility run by European aerospace giant Airbus should the company beat Boeing for the Air Force's next-generation airborne refueling tanker, further says:

Today's preliminary ruling clearly states that Boeing was involved in practices prohibited by the World Trade Organization. While the confidential nature of this report will allow Boeing supporters to attempt to spin the facts in the media, it is clear that they can no longer rationally claim that this trade dispute is one sided. In fact, it is quite the contrary.  However, as I have continuously said, we must not allow either report to delay the tanker replacement program or muddy the competition with politics. Our goal must remain the same –- deliver the best, most capable aircraft for the warfighter at the best value for the taxpayer.

As sister publication Inside U.S. Trade reported this summer, the European Union on July 21 notified the WTO that it is appealing virtually every aspect of the June 30 WTO panel finding that EU member states provided subsidies to Airbus. Further:

Sources close to the EU said that, due to the complexity of the appeal, they expect the Appellate Body to take longer than 90 days to review the appeal, which is the timetable outlined in the WTO's Dispute Settlement Understanding. They noted that the appeal of the U.S. cotton subsidies case took 136 days, and the U.S. hormones case appeal took 140 days.

In a July 20 background briefing for reporters, sources close to the EU said it is highly unlikely that the Appellate Body would rule on the Airbus case appeal before mid-September, when an interim ruling is expected in the separate WTO case filed by the EU against alleged subsidies provided to Boeing, the rival of Airbus.

These sources denied that the EU planned to file such an extensive appeal in order to drag out the litigation process. One source said the EU will appeal virtually every aspect of the case because the panel had erred so extensively.

Some sources argue that it is in the EU's interest to drag out the appeals process in light of the fact that the Air Force is expected to decide by mid-November whether Boeing or the European Aeronautic Defense and Space (EADS) company, the parent company of Airbus, will win a $35 billion aerial refueling tanker contract. An EU source denied that the tanker contract played any role in the appeals process.

If the appeal in the Airbus case concluded prior to the issuance of this contract, and if it upheld panel findings that EU member states provided subsidies to Airbus in violation of WTO rules, it would bolster arguments by Boeing supporters in the U.S. Congress that the Air Force should not award the contract to EADS, these sources said.

By John Liang
September 15, 2010 at 3:08 PM

The Pentagon inspector general's office this week released a more-detailed response to a Senate report that called the Defense Department's accounting system "broken."

In its preliminary response released last week, the IG wrote that he was "refocusing" his office's audit priorities, InsideDefense.com reported on Monday:

Last week, Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Charles Grassley (R-IA) released a report that "identified one all-important, central element that is adversely affecting every facet of the OIG audit program -- the DOD's broken accounting system."

"This dysfunctional system is driving the audit freight train," the report states. "The success or failure of an audit turns on the quality of financial data available for audit by competent examiners. Unfortunately, the quality of the financial data presented to OIG auditors by DOD during the period reviewed by the staff should probably be rated as poor to non-existent."

In a Sept. 10 letter to Grassley, DOD Inspector General Gordon Heddell promises to "carefully review" the report's recommendations.

"As you know, early last year as Acting Inspector General, I reached out to your office to share my vision for the future of the DOD Inspector General and welcomed an independent look at the focus and processes within Audit," Heddell's letter states. "The observations and recommendations in your report will be a valuable supplement to the efforts I have already initiated to reach my goal of providing timely, accurate, and relevant information to both the Congress and the Department."

In his more-detailed Sept. 13 letter to Grassley, Heddell writes that he has "directed the deputy inspector general for auditing and her staff to make concrete and specific proposals on how your report can be used to improve the time lines, focus and relevance of audit reports. Furthermore, I have directed that these proposals, to be completed no later than Oct. 15, 2010, are supplemented by a detailed plan listing specific initiatives to be implemented at the earliest possible date. The recommendations in your report will be an important tool in the transformation I have initiated since being confirmed as inspector general."

By Marcus Weisgerber
September 14, 2010 at 3:09 PM

EADS reached a critical milestone last week when one of its Airbus A330-based tankers passed fuel at a 12,000 gallon-per minute rate, according to a top company official.

The in-flight transfer happened last week, according to Ralph Crosby, chairman of EADS North America.

Crosby's comments -- made during a breakfast meeting with reporters at an Air Force Association-sponsored conference in National Harbor, MD -- come as the Air Force is evaluating bids from EADS and Boeing in the service's KC-X next-generation tanker competition.

The 12,000 gallon-per minute transfer rate is one of more than 370 requirements in the Air Force KC-X competition.

Because bids for the competition are already in, the company could only tout the accomplishment to the Air Force in final proposal revisions, should the service ask for them.