The Insider

The Congressional Budget Office believes the Pentagon can shave $6 billion from the price tag of repairing war-torn equipment by adjusting the pace of U.S. troops withdrawals from Iraq.

In an Oct. 7 letter to Rep. John Tierney (D-MA), the non-partisan CBO outlines four alternatives for how the Pentagon might remove equipment and forces from Iraq and still meet the Obama administration's commitment to be gone by the end of 2011. Tierney is chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform national security and foreign affairs subcommittee.

Current plans will require $41 billion to reconstitute war-torn equipment, which CBO believes can be pared back to as little as $35 billion by beginning to withdraw slightly more than four brigades a month beginning this month through next June. The administration plans to sustain current force levels of 128,000 troops in Iraq through the December elections, and in February begin withdrawing three brigades a month through August 2010.

With Congress a full week into fiscal year 2010, House lawmakers have yet to officially designate who will negotiate the FY-10 defense appropriations bill.

Traditionally the members of the subcommittees of both chambers are the conferees. On Oct. 6, the Senate Appropriations Committee appointed Sens. Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Byron Dorgan (D-ND), Richard Durbin (D-IL), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Herb Kohl (D-WI), Patty Murray (D-WA), Arlen Specter (D-PA), Ranking Member Thad Cochran (R-MS), Kit Bond (R-MO), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Richard Shelby (R-AL), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX), Robert Bennett (R-UT) and Sam Brownback (R-KS).

A House staffer tells InsideDefense.com that the conference meetings could begin next week, with the two chambers voting on the final compromise bill the following week.

One of the ways to accelerate the growth of the Afghan National Security Forces is to simply extend the recruits' training days. That is one of the recommendations from the former head of the Iraqi army training effort that Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the head of NATO forces in Afghanistan, chose to include in his Aug. 30 Afghanistan assessment to Pentagon leaders.

But along with introducing perhaps 60- or 72-hour work weeks, the mindset in the corridors of Kabul's ministries must change, retired Army Lt. Gen. James Dubik argued in a July 16 memo to McChrystal.

"Given what our nation has already invested in blood and treasure and how that investment has and is growing, I believe a full-court, strategic press is necessary in two areas," Dubik's memo states.

"Part of the 'growth' necessary in the Afghan ministries concerns understanding that they will have to begin to carry out more of the financial burden -- within the ((country's)) actual means. All cannot come from the donor coffers much longer. This will be a huge psychological shift. At the right time over the next year, we should consider beginning to develop small steps in this regard to overcome the current inertia and build a foundation for the future."

Dubik also called for "increased intensity" within Afghanistan's security ministries and training centers. The Combined Security Transition Command-Afghanistan "is not in a 'business as usual' position, yet I sense some of our Afghan partners are," he wrote.

As for police forces training, in particular, Dubik recommended the creation of one or more Kabul Police Academy "extension colleges" to help generate graduates more quickly.

The second industry day on the Army's new ground combat vehicle effort will be held Nov. 23 to Nov. 25 at the Tank and Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Center in Warren, MI, according to the program executive office integration.

The first two days are slated for full days, while the last -- the day before Thanksgiving -- will be a half-day. Vice Chief of Staff of the Army Gen. Peter Chiarelli is scheduled to be the event's keynote speaker on Nov. 24.

Don't assume that the Obama administration's ongoing review of export control policy will lead to the easing of licensing requirements, according to a State Department official.

National security considerations will dominate the review, Robert Kovac, the head of the State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC), emphasized last week. As Inside U.S. Trade reported:

“Take this to the bank -- the litmus on this ((interagency review)) is going to be U.S. national security,” Kovac said in a Sept. 30 session at the Update Conference on Export Controls and Policy. “There are going to be all kinds of other factors, but the one that is going to be paramount is going to be national security.”

He also made the point that the outcome of the review is not necessarily a decision to decontrol items now subject to licensing.

According to Kovac, there are no “preconceived conclusions” about the review that would influence officials’ findings. Therefore, export control requirements could be tightened or they could be loosened, he said.

The administration’s review is divided into short- and medium-term steps meant to clear out languishing export control decisions as well as a fundamental review to shape an export control system for the future, according to Acting Deputy Assistant Commerce Secretary for Export Administration Matthew Borman.

Borman participated with Kovac and other administration officials in the opening panel of the conference organized by the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS).

Kovac downplayed the extent to which a fundamental change in U.S. export controls could be achieved administratively. “We keep tinkering around the edges, ((but)) fundamental change will probably require legislation,” he said.

Kovac said he was “very excited” about the export control review because today’s commercial realities of global research and development or international defense production are not reflected in the laws underlying U.S. export controls.

Those laws are the Arms Export Control Act governing munitions exports and the expired Export Administration Act that governs dual-use exports.

As an example of how defense production realities have overtaken the statutory framework of the Arms Export Control Act, Kovac cited the Joint Strike Fighter. He said it is being co-designed and developed by nine countries and involves 52 major companies, not counting the subcontractors.

Kovac said he hoped that the administration could get Congress on board with whatever recommendations the review will produce. “We are going to involve Congress in this ((review)) early and often,” Kovac said.

He said an important part of the administration’s review will be the review of the export control lists and deciding what should remain controlled or taken off the list.

Representing the Defense Department at the panel was Anthony Aldwell of the Defense Technology Security Administration (DTSA). He emphasized that Defense Secretary Robert Gates is “fully pledged” to examining export controls in a “very comprehensive” way in an effort to improve the current system.

The review, which he said was still at the “very early stages,” will be the number one priority for DTSA this fall, he said.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, speaking this morning at the big AUSA convention in Washington, said President Obama’s upcoming decisions on the Afghanistan campaign would be among the most important of his presidency.

“So, it’s important that we take our time to do all we can to get this right,” he said.

He reminded military and civilian advisers that advice to the president should be given “candidly but privately,” bringing to mind Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s recent speech at the Institute of International and Strategic Studies in London, where he rejected calls to change strategy in Afghanistan. During the Oct. 1 speech, McChrystal was asked whether he would support a scaling back of efforts in Afghanistan to pursue a strategy focused on hunting Al Qaeda through limited air strike. “The short answer is: No," he said.

Gates’ remarks this morning reflected a somewhat different attitude.

“And speaking for the Department of Defense, once the commander in chief makes his decisions, we will salute and execute those decisions faithfully and to the best of our ability,” said Gates.

To support operations in Afghanistan, Gates said he has ordered additional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities, “including the most advanced drones, such as the MC-12 unmanned aerial vehicle,” as well as additional explosive ordnance disposal teams. He also noted the delivery of the first M-ATVs to theater last week “only three months after the initial contract was awarded.”

The Pentagon is fighting a congressional proposal to expand lawmakers' access to information about the integrity and performance of contractors. The objections to section 834 of the House's fiscal year 2010 defense authorization bill are included in the Pentagon's sixth package of defense authorization appeals, dated Sept. 30.

The appeals are a last-ditch effort to sway House and Senate conferees as they wrap up work on the final version of the bill.

Section 834 would give any member of Congress access to a contracting database that is now open only to the chairmen and ranking members of committees with jurisdiction. The Defense Department's appeal argues access to the database should remain tight because it contains "sensitive information used to make responsibility determinations by acquisition officials."

Citing the new requirement for posting contracting officers' determination that a source is not responsible, the appeal argues the integrity of the database depends on keeping this information under wraps. "Contracting officers may be reluctant to be totally honest in making this determination if a lawsuit may ensue," DOD writes.

The appeals package also complains that House and Senate authorizers both declined to support DOD's request for new authority to activate Reserve forces in case of disasters. Governors have opposed this idea.

Further, the appeals object to provisions requiring interrogations to be filmed and not performed by contractors.