The Insider

Coordination Conundrum
By John Liang
July 19, 2011 at 4:12 PM

The Pentagon recently released an updated document on its doctrine for working with non-Defense Department organizations, whether they be U.S. government branches or foreign.

Joint Publication 3-08 "sets forth joint doctrine to govern the activities and performance of the Armed Forces of the United States in joint operations and provides the doctrinal basis for interagency coordination and for US military involvement in multinational operations." Among the updates to the previous document, which came out in 2006:

* Changes the publication title from Interagency, Intergovernmental Organization, and Nongovernmental Organization Coordination During Joint Operations to Interorganizational Coordination During Joint Operations

* Reorganizes the publication from two volumes into a single volume

* Revises the discussion on organizing for successful interagency, intergovernmental organization, and nongovernmental organization coordination

* Updates the discussion on the National Security Council, Homeland Security Council, and National Security Staff

* Updates the discussion for federal interagency coordination during homeland defense and civil support

* Updates descriptions of federal agencies, intergovernmental organizations, and nongovernmental organizations

* Adds a discussion on a whole-of-government approach

* Adds a discussion on strategic communication

* Adds a discussion of the private sector

* Adds coverage on forming a joint interagency task force

* Adds appendices: "Joint Interagency Coordination Group," "Joint Interagency Task Force," "Provincial Reconstruction Team," "The Interagency Management System for Reconstruction and Stabilization," "The Interagency Conflict Assessment Framework," "Example Guidelines for Relations Between the Armed Forces of the United States and Other Organizations," "United States Agency for International Development Civilian-Military Cooperation Policy," and "Joint Force Headquarters-State"

* Modifies the definitions of the terms "disaster assistance response team," "interagency," and "joint interagency coordination group"

* Adds definitions for the terms "development assistance" and "interorganizational coordination"

* Removes the terms "chancery," "civil affairs activities," "complex contingency operations," "developmental assistance," "diplomatic and/or consular facility," "resolution," and "US Defense Representative" from Joint Publication 1-02, Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms.

'Hollow Growth'
By Jason Sherman
July 18, 2011 at 6:57 PM

Todd Harrison, budget expert at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, argues in a new report published today that the spike in U.S. defense spending over the last decade produced "hollow growth."

Harrison, in an 86-page assessment of the Pentagon's fiscal year 2012 budget request, states rising expenditures for weapons acquisition, personnel and peacetime operations did not necessarily buy the Defense Department more:

Overall, nearly half of the growth in defense spending over the past decade is unrelated to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq -- personnel costs grew while end strength remained relatively flat, the cost of peacetime operations grew while the pace of peacetime operations declined, and acquisition costs increased while the inventory of equipment grew smaller and older. The base budget now supports a force with essentially the same size, force structure, and capabilities as in FY 2001 but at a 35 percent higher cost. The Department is spending more but not getting more.

Much more, including a review of current proposals to reduce defense spending and "key levers" to control military spending can be found in the full report.

New TRANSCOM Chief
By John Liang
July 15, 2011 at 6:35 PM

Air Force Gen. William Fraser III has been nominated to replace Gen. Duncan McNabb as head of U.S. Transportation Command, according to a just-released Pentagon statement.  Fraser is currently serving as chief of Air Combat Command.

According to Fraser's official bio:

As the commander, [Fraser] is responsible for organizing, training, equipping and maintaining combat-ready forces for rapid deployment and employment while ensuring strategic air defense forces are ready to meet the challenges of peacetime air sovereignty and wartime defense. ACC operates more than 1,000 aircraft, 22 wings, 13 bases, and more than 300 operating locations worldwide with 79,000 active-duty and civilian personnel. When mobilized, the Air National Guard and Air Force Reserve contribute more than 700 aircraft and 49,000 people to ACC. As the Combat Air Forces lead agent, ACC develops strategy, doctrine, concepts, tactics, and procedures for air and space power employment. The command provides conventional and information warfare forces to all unified commands to ensure air, space and information superiority for warfighters and national decision-makers. ACC can also be called upon to assist national agencies with intelligence, surveillance and crisis response capabilities.

General Fraser entered the Air Force in 1974 as a distinguished graduate of the Texas A&M University ROTC program. His operational assignments include duty as a T-37, B-52, B-1, and B-2 instructor pilot and evaluator. General Fraser has commanded an operations group and two bomb wings. His staff duties include tours on the Air Staff, Joint Staff, and Joint Strategic Target Planning Staff at Offutt AFB, Neb. He has also served as Chief of the Nuclear Requirements Cell at Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, Chief of Staff for U.S. Strategic Command, and as the Assistant to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

General Fraser has extensive wartime, contingency, and humanitarian relief operational experience. During Operation Enduring Freedom he led an intelligence fusion organization that provided direct support to the warfighter. Prior to assuming his current position, General Fraser served as the Air Force Vice Chief of Staff.

No word yet as to McNabb's next post.

To Be Heard
By John Liang
July 14, 2011 at 8:02 PM

The Senate Armed Services Committee just announced a hearing to be held next week to consider the nominations of three senior military leaders:

Admiral James A. Winnefeld, Jr., USN for reappointment to the grade of admiral and to be Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff;

General Raymond T. Odierno, USA for reappointment to the grade of general and to be Chief of Staff, United States Army; and

General William M. Fraser III, USAF for reappointment to the grade of general and to be Commander, United States Transportation Command.

The hearing will take place at 9:30 a.m. on July 21, according to a committee statement.

Energy Impact
By John Liang
July 14, 2011 at 7:52 PM

The Pentagon recently looked at 249 renewable energy projects proposed in 35 states and Puerto Rico, and found that "229 have little or no impact on military missions, thus clearing the way for the future production of more than 10 gigawatts of renewable energy generation capacity," according to a Defense Department statement released this afternoon. Further:

These new energy projects will increase the nation's energy security while ensuring that our military services have the test capabilities, training venues, and equipment to help keep America safe.

The DoD will undertake further studies and negotiations with developers, in consultation with the appropriate federal agencies and state and local governments, of the 20 projects that may pose adverse impacts on military readiness and operations.  The department's goal in those negotiations will be to mitigate any potential adverse effects and allow the projects to move forward that are found to have little or no impact on military missions.

The review involved approximately 6,500 wind turbines and 30 solar projects, according to DOD. Click here to view the complete list of the projects.

Cyberspace Strategy
By John Liang
July 14, 2011 at 6:13 PM

The Pentagon's new cyberspace strategy has five "strategic initiatives":

Treat cyberspace as an operational domain to organize, train, and equip so that DOD can take full advantage of cyberspace's potential;

Employ new defense operating concepts to protect DOD networks and systems;

Partner with other U.S. government departments and agencies and the private sector to enable a whole-of-government cybersecurity strategy;

Build robust relationships with U.S. allies and international partners to strengthen collective cybersecurity;

Leverage the nation's ingenuity through an exceptional cyber workforce and rapid technological innovation.

Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright said during a briefing this morning that the Pentagon must shift its cybersecurity focus from defensively protecting its networks to deterring hackers' attacks. As InsideDefense.com reports:

During a breakfast with reporters, Cartwright said the Defense Department's approach to cybersecurity consists of "90 percent of thinking about how to build the next best firewall and 10 percent thinking about what we might do to keep them from attacking us."

DOD, he said, must reverse those percentages.

The Pentagon released its long-awaited cybersecurity strategy today, after Cartwright spoke. He noted the strategy addresses how the department should defend its networks. But, he added, the next iteration must look at how to dissuade and disincentivize would-be attackers. DOD has to convince hackers that the price of attacking a DOD network will be too costly, he said.

The "'if-I-don't-get-in-today-I'll-just-try-them-again-tomorrow mindset' -- we've got to change that," Cartwright said. "Right now we're on a path that is too predictable -- way too predictable. It's purely defensive."

Click here for the rest of the article, and here to read the document.

Dirty Bombs
By John Liang
July 13, 2011 at 6:39 PM

A recent Congressional Research Service report on conventional bombs that could spread radiation within a population base raises a host of issues on how to deal with such so-called "dirty bombs," including:

• the priority for countering [Radiological dispersal devices] vs. other [chemical,biological, radiological and nuclear weapons];

• the priority given to securing domestic vs. overseas radioactive sources;

• whether to establish a radiation detection system in cities;

• how best to prepare for decontamination following an RDD attack;

• how to dispose of potentially large volumes of waste generated by decontamination;

• whether to modify certain personnel reliability standards;

• whether to modify the pace of a program for implementing certain security enhancements for U.S. radioactive sources; and

• how to improve radiological forensics capability.

CRS doesn't normally release its reports to the public.

Empaneled
By Christopher J. Castelli
July 12, 2011 at 8:44 PM

Rep. Buck McKeon (R-CA.), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, and Ranking Member Adam Smith (D-WA) today announced the creation of a "special bipartisan panel," led by Rep. Mike Conaway (R-TX) and Rep. Rob Andrews (D-NJ), charged with addressing "the ongoing challenge of financial management in the Pentagon."

In a statement, the lawmakers said the panel would address "broad issues surrounding Defense Department financial management," including the extent to which financial management systems deliver timely, reliable and useful information for decision-making and reporting; DOD's ability to identify efficiencies and waste utilizing financial management systems; the proficiency of financial management personnel in financial and budgetary accounting in order to manage defense resources; and the effectiveness of the Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness plan.

“In these difficult fiscal times, making every penny in the defense budget count must be a top national security priority,” said Conaway. "Improving accountability and reducing waste within the DOD will save taxpayers money and it is essential to reducing our deficit," added Andrews.

'Specially Designed'
By John Liang
July 12, 2011 at 3:00 PM

The Commerce Department could unveil as early as this week a new definition for generic parts, components, accessories and attachments that are "specially designed" for weapons but are not significant enough to fall under the strict controls of the U.S. Munitions List (USML), and for end items that have a uniquely military use but also a civil and commercial application, Inside U.S. Trade reported late last month.

Kevin Wolf, assistant Commerce secretary for export administration, told the Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee (RPTAC) on June 14 that these items warrant some degree of control on the Commerce Control List (CCL), just not the same degree of control that they now face on the USML. Inside U.S. Trade further reported:

For example, among the end items the proposed definition is meant to cover are machine tools specially designed to make missiles, he said.

This new definition of specially designed will be part of a broader proposed regulation to be issued in July, before the July 18-21 export control update conference. It will lay out the framework for moving items of the USML to the CCL as part of the administration's export control reform initiative.

Many specially designed items on the USML are expected to move to the CCL as part of the administration's export control reform initiative, Wolf said. Remaining on the USML will be items that have apparent military and intelligence system, he said.

Wolf said the ultimate goal is to write out the term "specially designed" altogether from U.S. control lists and come up with better descriptions of items that are controlled. But, since the term is used in various forms within the multilateral export control regimes such as the Wassenaar Arrangement and Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), he acknowledged that working multilaterally to replace that term could take "a very long time."

The USML reflects the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR), which uses the term "specifically designed or modified" as one of three elements defining a defense item.

The Export Administration Regulations (EAR), which govern the CCL, use the term "specially designed" in a number of different contexts and no clear indication if its definition in one area applies to the others, according to private-sector sources.

For example, section 772 of the EAR defines "specially designed" in the context of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MCTR) as a piece of equipment designed only for use in a missile that has no other function or use. It is also used to define ancillary cryptography, which is subject to less stringent export controls than other types of encryption.

According to Wolf, the new definition has to be a term that is "common, objective [and] not inconsistent" with the definition of specially designed in the MTCR, which he said is narrowly tailored to that specific control regime and not acceptable to other applications of the term, such as decontrolling generic parts and components that have potential for use in commercial end items.

Reducing Nukes
By John Liang
July 11, 2011 at 4:06 PM

Reducing the number of nuclear weapons in the world cannot be done by a single nation, according to a senior State Department official.

Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Ellen Tauscher said in a speech in Paris late last month that "we need other countries to step forward with us and follow in our footsteps. Other countries need to be as transparent and as open as we are to provide confidence for deep reductions. Our actions show that transparency and security can go together. Secrecy may sometimes be necessary, but it also can lead to misunderstandings, miscalculations, and mistrust."

According to the text of her just-released speech, delivered on June 29:

While we have a growing consensus that a world without nuclear weapons is in all our interests, it is still fragile. Nuclear disarmament itself is not necessarily the Holy Grail, especially if we do not increase international stability and security. The journey and each step along the way is just as important, if not more important than the destination. These steps can enhance our mutual security and create a growing sense of momentum.

It is for this very reason why the P-5 follow-on conference, which begins tomorrow morning and will continue through Friday, is such a valuable exercise. It is a successor to an initial conference held in London in September 2009.

All of us have brought our experts from capitals to have a frank and detailed exchange on verification and transparency measures that can further enable future steps on disarmament.

From an American perspective, we so enjoy coming to these conferences that we want to make it a regular habit. It is important that our emerging dialogue in the P-5 context evolve into a regular component of our bilateral and multilateral relationships. That is essential if we are to make progress on the objectives set forth in the 2010 NPT Review Conference Action Plan.

One core principle we should all share is that, as we draw down, other countries should not build up. That is why the United States is investing so much energy to begin negotiations on a Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty (FMCT). There are already too many nuclear weapons and too much fissile material for such weapons in this world. We do not need more fissile material that could be used to make more bombs, and we do not want to add to the risk of theft or misuse.

It remains our strong preference to house FMCT negotiations within the Conference on Disarmament (CD). Yet, so long as efforts to agree on a Program of Work remain deadlocked, it is only appropriate that we explore alternate venues.

Preserving the FMCT inside the CD when that body remains paralyzed only ensures that progress on an FMCT will remain out of our collective grasp.

Appropriations Approval
By Christopher J. Castelli
July 8, 2011 at 4:17 PM

The House today voted 336-87 to approve the fiscal year 2012 defense appropriations bill.

Senate appropriators have not yet released their version of the bill.

Lynn Out -- Updated
By Dan Dupont
July 7, 2011 at 5:29 PM

The Associated Press is reporting that Deputy Defense Secretary Bill Lynn will resign this year:

In a further shake-up of U.S. defense leaders, the Pentagon's second-ranking official said Thursday he intends to resign but has agreed to stay on the job until Defense Secretary Leon Panetta chooses a successor.

Deputy Defense Secretary William J. Lynn III said in an Associated Press interview that he told Panetta last Friday, on Panetta's first day as Pentagon chief, that he planned to resign for personal reasons.

"I thought this was a logical point for me to depart the Pentagon," Lynn said during the interview in his office.

He said he told Panetta that he would be best served by having a deputy who was willing to stay at least through President Barack Obama's first term, which ends in January 2013.

"I did not think I could commit for that type of timeline," he said.

Lynn said he was leaving for "personal, family reasons," and wanted to spend more time with his children. He said it had nothing to do with Obama's choice of CIA director Panetta to succeed Robert Gates. Lynn said he knew Panetta only slightly from periodic contact while both served in the Clinton administration.

UPDATED 1:45: Panetta has issued a statement:

William J. Lynn III, the third-longest serving deputy secretary in the post-Cold War era, today announced his intention to step down as deputy secretary and return to private life. Lynn met with Secretary of Defense Leon E. Panetta late last week to discuss his plans. At Panetta’s request, Lynn has agreed to remain until a successor is in place this fall.

“Bill Lynn has provided outstanding advice and counsel to this department and to the nation over the course of his long career,” said Panetta. “I will rely on his experience and expertise during this transition period. His service will be greatly missed.”

As the nation’s 30th deputy secretary of defense, Lynn capped a nearly two-decade career of government service, during which he served as senior national security advisor to the late Sen. Edward Kennedy and a senior advisor to five secretaries of defense.

“It has been a rare privilege to serve in the Department of Defense during such a challenging time,” said Lynn. “And it has been an honor to serve alongside an outstanding group of civilian and military members who every day demonstrate the value to this nation of their unwavering commitment and dedicated service.”

During his tenure, Lynn helped the department navigate new strategic and fiscal realities, while supporting efforts in two wars. He helped create a new space policy, the department’s first ever operational-energy strategy, and a landmark cyber strategy to protect the nation in the digital age, including the creation of the U.S. Cyber Command. He received widespread praise from America’s men and women in uniform for expanding their use of social media to communicate with their families while deployed.

Lynn also oversaw the department’s budget process, relations with the defense industry, and acquisition process, including the department’s successful bid for a new refueling tanker.

Improving the care and treatment of wounded warriors was also a signature issue for Lynn, who implemented a new system of disability evaluation and oversaw the department’s development of an integrated electronic health record.

Lynn will continue living in the Washington D.C., area but has not yet announced any future plans.

Defense Business Systems
By John Liang
July 7, 2011 at 3:17 PM

The Pentagon acquisition office recently released a "directive-type" memo outlining an updated acquisition policy for defense business systems (DBS). The memo:

Establishes policy requiring the use of the Business Capability Lifecycle (BCL) model as the acquisition process for DBS, and assigns responsibilities and provides procedures for meeting BCL and DBS requirements. The principles of BCL can be applied at the increment or at the release level - BCL provides the framework for structuring the definition, development, testing, production, deployment, and support of DBS. This model is a guideline and tailoring, consistent with statute and sound business practice, is encouraged.

The memo mandates that BCL is "the overarching framework for the planning, design, acquisition, deployment, operations, maintenance, and modernization of DBS," and applies to any DBS modernization effort with a total cost of more than $1 million. Further:

When a Major Automated Information System (MAIS) DBS employs an incremental acquisition approach, all functional capabilities associated with a given increment shall be reflected in any resultant Acquisition Program Baseline (APB) (cost, performance, and schedule) and must be achievable within 5 years from when funds were first obligated. For all DBS that are not MAIS or otherwise designated, they must achieve Initial Operating Capability within 5 years from Milestone (MS) A. Delivery of capability within an increment (e.g., releases, sub-phases, software drops) must be based on technologies that have been determined to be mature at the MS B decision review. Functional capabilities that are not supported by adequate cost estimates, mature technologies, etc., shall be deferred to subsequent program increment(s).

CSAR Shift
By Gabe Starosta
July 6, 2011 at 5:50 PM

An omnibus reprogramming request submitted to Congress on June 30 would shift $10 million in research and development money appropriated for the CSAR-X program, which was canceled two years ago.

The omnibus reprogramming request, signed by Defense Department Comptroller Robert Hale, involves the transfer of some $6 billion among DOD accounts, and one section of the document focuses on funds appropriated in fiscal year 2010. One of those FY-10 items involves slightly more than $10 million in research, development, test and evaluation accounts for the CSAR-X, which then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates killed in June 2009. The Air Force has since replaced the initiative with a competition for a new combat-search-and-rescue helicopter known as HH-60 Recap.

Boeing won the original CSAR-X competition in 2006, but protests from other contractors prevented work on the project for years, leading Gates to cancel it. The reprogramming request, if approved, would still leave $4 million in the CSAR-X RDT&E account.

Fighters For Taiwan
By John Liang
July 6, 2011 at 3:13 PM

Lobbyists for Taiwan are claiming that allowing the island to import F-16 fighter aircraft would have a "positive impact" on U.S. jobs, noting Lockheed Martin announced last week that 1,500 workers would be laid off from its aeronautics division.

U.S.-Taiwan Business Council President Rupert Hammond-Chambers said in a statement released today:

The recent Perryman Report shows that the follow-on sale of F-16s to Taiwan would have a positive economic impact around the country, generating some US$8.7 billion in gross output and sustaining approximately 16,000 direct and indirect jobs over the life of the program. That would represent a significant economic boost to states such as Ohio and Florida -- where unemployment stands at 8.6 percent and 10.6 percent, respectively. Reports estimate that 1,800 workers in Ohio and 1,900 in Florida depend on an F-16 sale to Taiwan. Should the Taiwan sale fail to materialize, however, current orders would only sustain the F-16 production line for another two years.