The Insider

Defense Secretary Robert Gates -- who recently visited China, Japan and North Korea -- and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are slated meet with President Obama in the Oval Office late this afternoon, a couple of hours before the president hosts a private dinner for China's president, Hu Jintao.

Tonight's dinner will be attended by the president, Clinton, White House National Security Adviser Tom Donilon, Hu and two other Chinese officials, Donilon told reporters last week. Gates, who met with Hu last week in Beijing, is not slated to be there. This will be the eighth face-to-face meeting between Obama and Hu. The meal in the Old Family Dining Room at the White House will be an "unusually small dinner that we’ll have with President Hu, again reflecting the relationship that we are evolving, and the opportunity to have candid conversation in much less formal settings than you typically would see, frankly, in a meeting between the Chinese and the United States," Donilon said. Spouses will not attend, he noted.

On Wednesday morning, there will be an arrival ceremony on the South Lawn. This will be followed by a small bilateral meeting in the Oval Office and then an expanded bilateral meeting in the Cabinet Room. After those meetings, the two presidents will meet for about 45 minutes with U.S. and Chinese business leaders and CEOs in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building. Then, Obama and Hu will hold a joint press conference. Next, Hu will attend a State Department luncheon hosted by Vice President Biden and Secretary Clinton. Hu is also slated to meet with House and Senate leaders Wednesday afternoon. That evening, the White House will hold a state dinner for Hu.

But expect to hear more from Hu the next day. He'll give a speech Thursday at the Marriott Wardman Park hotel during a luncheon held by the National Committee on United States-China Relations and the U.S.-China Business Council. After his speech, Hu is slated to fly to Chicago to attend various events.

The House Armed Services Committee will meet on Thursday morning to approve a new "rules package" and "oversight plan" proposed by panel Chairman Buck McKeon (R-CA) "that fulfills his commitment to place the Armed Services Committee on a 'war footing' in the 112th Congress," according to a committee statement issued this morning:

The draft rules package contains a reorganization of the Armed Services subcommittee structure that better aligns the seven subcommittees with current operations and future threats.  Other proposed changes to the committee rules fulfill new transparency requirements adopted by the U.S. House of Representatives earlier this month.

These include, but are not limited to, the following:

* Commitment to post online within 24 hours any amendment adopted by the committee;

* Commitment to post online within 48 hours the results of all roll call votes of the committee; and

* Commitment to post legislation online at least 24 hours prior to consideration by the committee.

The Armed Services Committee has a strong bipartisan tradition of translating oversight activities into prescriptive legislative action that provides for the nation’s common defense and the men and women of our Armed Forces.  The committee, under the leadership of Chairman McKeon, will continue to maintain a strong linkage between formal oversight efforts and legislative initiatives.  The committee’s draft oversight plan is the roadmap for how committee members will achieve that end.

As the committee executes its oversight activities, members may call upon the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the individual service secretaries and chiefs of staff, combatant commanders, other officials of the Department of Defense and the military departments, officials from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Central Intelligence Agency and other defense-related intelligence agencies, and the Secretary of Energy, the Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and other officials of the Department of Energy.

Given the unique nature of the national security challenges facing America’s Armed Forces, including the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Chairman McKeon believes that some high profile and immediate issues will not allow for members to plan comprehensively and predict all oversight activities.  Much of the committee’s most demanding oversight will be, by definition, event-driven and not subject to prior planning.

For example, Chairman McKeon has committed to placing the Armed Services Committee on a “war footing.”  This will include in-depth assessments of military operations and other major events that are generally difficult to predict in advance.  The committee’s oversight plan has been crafted to maintain an effective and flexible oversight structure to ensure current operations remain the top priority of the committee.

The committee’s oversight plan will also focus heavily of the fiscal health of the Department of Defense and military services.  Americans are demanding greater accountability on how the federal government spends taxpayer money.  Through its oversight activities, the committee will closely scrutinize Department of Defense programs, processes and weapons systems to ensure every taxpayer dollar is being spent wisely.

The Missile Defense Agency has pushed back the due date of the final request for proposals for a new class of intercontinental ballistic missile targets to March, according to a Federal Business Opportunities notice published this morning:

The Missile Defense Agency received numerous inputs and feedback from Industry since the release of the Draft RFP and Industry Day. To ensure all industry feedback is reviewed and considered for incorporation into the final solicitation documents, the release of the FINAL RFP will be early March 2011.

The original due date was last month.

According to the original FedBizOpps notice:

Under FEDBIZOPPS announcement HQ0147-09-R-0011, released on July 2, 2009, the Government announced intent to award competitive, fixed priced and cost-reimbursement contract(s) to continue support of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) Element and System Flight Tests, to include Short Range Ballistic Missile (SRBM), Medium Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM), Intermediate Range Ballistic Missile (IRBM), and Inter-Continental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) target systems. This pre-solicitation notice specifically addresses MDA’s ICBM Target Class requirements. ICBM requirements include development and manufacturing of ICBMs, integrated logistics support to include inventory storage and maintenance, pre and post mission analysis, launch preparation and execution, and engineering services to include Ballistic Missile Defense System modeling and simulation support. The requirement is for targets under a contract including cost-reimbursement and fixed priced contract line items.

Rep. Todd Akin (R-MO), the incoming chairman of the House Armed Services seapower and expeditionary forces subcommittee, told reporters today that he does not know “where we're going to come out as a committee” regarding the Marine Corps Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle program, but buying at least some EFVs is a possibility.

Akin voiced concern over Defense Secretary Robert Gates' announcement last week that the Pentagon would ax the troubled program due to its high cost, but he said following his address at the Surface Navy Association's annual symposium that the Marine Corps appears to be in favor of the decision and not simply doing as told.

“We've been convinced they genuinely think it's too much money for what their budget can handle,” he said.

Akin said his panel would consider buying at least some EFVs or completely resubmitting the program “because the engineering is 20 years old at this point.”

The Marine Corps said it will completely cease production of EFVs and will issue a request for proposals soon to find a follow-on program to fill the capability. The Marines will upgrade legacy vehicles and use a mix of other existing capabilities to bridge the gap, according to Gates.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), a former Marine and member of the subcommittee, told Inside the Navy last week that members of the panel were “standing firm . . . that this is the most needed product in the United States Marine Corps.”

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos today pledged to use his position and prestige to independently monitor the development of the troubled F-35B, which Defense Secretary Robert Gates last week put on a two-year probation in a bid to ensure the service acquires the Joint Strike Fighter short-takeoff-and-landing variant.

In a statement issued today, Amos -- the first pilot to lead the Marines -- said:

I personally met with top leadership within the F35 program, to include our industry partner, and communicated that I intend to personally track the progress of our airplane over the next two years. I will track every pound of weight growth, required engineering fixes, and every test point completed.

This strikes a different chord than that of his predecessor, Gen. James Conway, who 13 months ago asserted that the word of Robert Stevens, chief executive officer of JSF prime contractor Lockheed Martin, was good enough for him.

On Dec. 15, 2009, Conway was asked during a Pentagon press conference whether -- in light an independent assessment panel's assertion that more time and money were required to develop the F-35B -- he was confident the Marine Corps would be able to fulfill its plan to field its first JSF unit in 2012.

I just saw Bob Stevens last week, you know, and we stood closer than you and I are, and I asked him that question, okay. So -- and he's not a BS kind of guy. You know, he tells me he's got his A team on it, he still thinks he can make 2012, and all, you know, focuses are in that direction. So I got to take the man at his word.

Days after Conway's statement, the Pentagon committed to the first installment of what now amounts to $7.4 billion in remedial funding to be pumped into the program over the next five years, a sum paid for by slashing 246 aircraft from the Defense Department's JSF production plans through FY-16.

Here's the full exchange from the late 2009 press briefing.

Q    Let me ask about the Joint Strike Fighter, too. There's a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on this tomorrow. What's your level of concern these days, contrasted with earlier this year when you were fairly enthusiastic about the STOVL'S purported performance? You know, it hasn't flown yet, the full envelope, but we're still waiting, sir. What's your level of concern?

GEN. CONWAY:  Yeah. We have the first test aircraft at Pax [Patuxent] River. The second one, I think, is going to be there before the end of the year.

My focus . . . is on the promise that the contractor has made to us that we will have IOC [initial operational capability] of our first squadron -- and by the way, I think you know we're the first service to get an operational squadron -- in 2012. That is an important period to us because the British and the Italians, who are buying the same version that we are, are keenly interested in that. We have accepted risk now for a number of years not buying fourth-generation airplanes, such as the Navy has done, to await the arrival of this aircraft. We've got a small bathtub out there, a vulnerability with regard to attack and fighter aircraft.

So all of our planning is 2012 backwards. And when we ask that question, we get the same answer: We're going to make 2012 for you; it may be December of calendar year 2012, but we're going to make 2012 for you.

And what the contractors tell us, and in fact it's validated by the program manager, is that the ground test birds that we have used are going to be tremendously more impactful than they have been in the past, and that a lot of things that we're going -- that we could see when we start flying the experimental aircraft in the vertical takeoff mode will be less problematic for us.

I still fully expect to get an invitation in the spring of next year to go watch the first vertical flight at Pax River.

And if that happens, again, the contractors and the program manager tell me that we will be generally on the schedule that they think we need to follow.

Q     What does your BS meter tell you, though? I mean, you've heard this from the companies and the program manager before, that the thing is on schedule, it's going to do this, it's going to do that. I mean, are you getting more skeptical or are you --

GEN. CONWAY:  Well, I'm a -- I'm an unapologetic optimist, okay, I got to tell you that at the outset, I guess.  But, you know, I -- we are very concerned about it. We register that concern, okay. I just saw Bob Stevens last week, you know, and we stood closer than you and I are, and I asked him that question, okay.  So -- and he's not a BS kind of guy.  You know, he tells me he's got his A team on it, he still thinks he can make 2012, and all, you know, focuses are in that direction. So I got to take the man at his word. And so I think everybody understands how important it is and that we're not going to -- we're not going to let up.

Q     What are concerned about?  I don't -- this will be my last question.  What are you concerned about at this point, though?  That they may not make the '012 date, or that the program is just slipping too much?

GEN. CONWAY:  Our focus is 2012, okay.  And I think they're related. So long as that -- as that doesn't slip, then I -- I'm not going to be critical of the other things that they have in some of the areas of the program, okay. Cost rise and all that, that's someone else's concern, at least at this point, although we're watching it in a per-unit kind of consideration. But our focus is that we want to get those planes in and operational so we can start doing the same thing with the F-35 that we -- that we have done with Osprey.

Last evening the Marine Corps sent out an e-mail notifying reporters that the service's top combat development and integration officer would sit down Wednesday morning and talk about the recent cancellation of the Marines' Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle and what lies ahead for the service's amphibious warfare mission.

The subject line on the e-mail was "Signature Mission Intact, Marines Plot The Way Ahead For New Amphibious Vehicle." The message is as follows:

Please join Lt General George J. Flynn, Deputy Commandant for Combat Development and Integration, for a print media roundtable discussion (on the record) here at Marine Corps Base Quantico. The discussion will take place Wednesday January 12 at 9:00 AM. Topics will include the Expeditionary Fighting Vehicle's cancellation and the way ahead--to include both interim and long-term investment strategies and plans.

Last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced that the EFV was being canceled. The program, kicked off during the Reagan administration, has eaten up $3 billion and would cost another $12 billion to field a fleet of slightly more than 500 vehicles.

Gates made the point that the cancellation does not call into question the Marine Corps amphibious assault mission. He noted the Defense Department will "develop a more affordable and sustainable amphibious tractor to provide the Marines a ship-to-shore capability into the future."

Flynn should provide some specifics on that plan tomorrow morning.

With the Pentagon planning to implement a five-year, $78 billion cut imposed on military spending by the White House (while at the same time allowing the services to retain $100 billion in efficiencies garnered since June), Defense Secretary Robert Gates last month set a firm date for when Pentagon officials should begin including the price tag of any new program or initiative when it is formally proposed.

Last week, Gates announced the results of the efficiencies initiative he launched last year, as well as key elements of the Defense Department's fiscal year 2012 budget request. Part of Gates' efficiencies push involves a requirement that any new proposal or initiative, regardless of its size, come with a specific estimate of how much that new program would cost.

In a Dec. 27 memo, Gates wrote that guidance and support tools to help Pentagon officials calculate those costs were made available that month.

He adds:

I urge you to begin using these tools now. I am directing that, effective February 1, 2011, all of these tools be used to calculate costs associated with the aforementioned business activities in the department. After this date, every new proposal or initiative shall come with a cost estimate, and every report or study shall include the cost of that study on the front cover.

All DOD components are required to comply with this directive and are expected to fully support and cooperate with the guidance to ensure that costs are routinely considered in decision-making throughout the Department.