The Insider

By John Liang
December 16, 2010 at 5:55 PM

Evidently the Missile Defense Agency isn't the greatest place to work. At least according to Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK).

In a statement released today in the wake of yesterday's failed Ground-based Midcourse Defense intercept attempt, Inhofe says that recent funding reductions to MDA has resulted in the agency's "ranking of 223 of 224 for employee satisfaction and commitment in the 2010 Best Places to Work survey of Department of Defense (DoD) agency subcomponents."

Inhofe also makes a connection between what he sees as inadequate funding for missile defense and opposing the ratification of the follow-on Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty:

At the very same time that the Senate took up floor consideration of New START, which would place restrictions on nation's missile defense program, the Missile Defense Agency announced that it failed another planned Ground Based Interceptor (GBI) intercept of a ballistic missile target during a test over the Pacific Ocean. This was the MDA's second consecutive failure of a Ground Based Interceptor test and its third test failure since the MDA came under the control of the Obama Administration. Since then, the MDA budget has been cut by $200 million, GBI missile modernization has been reduced by nearly $2 Billion from its highest spending levels and the Airborne Laser has been reduced to a test and evaluation bed. . . . The Obama Administration is placing our national security at risk by failing to fully fund, field, modernize and test a missile defense system and pushing this Senate to ratify a nuclear arms treaty with Russia that clearly places limits on future developments of U.S. missile defense.  This is just another reason to oppose the New START Treaty.

By John Liang
December 16, 2010 at 4:15 PM

The House Republican Steering Committee is meeting this week to decide the committee membership in the next Congress. Among those decisions will be a recommendation from incoming House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) for Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-TX) to become vice chairman of the Armed Services Committee.

"Mac Thornberry is a real leader in our Conference on national security. His record on both the Armed Services and Intelligence Committees has shown him to be both an innovator and strategic thinker," Boehner said in a statement. "I am backing him to be the next vice chairman of the Armed Services Committee, a role that will provide Mac with new responsibilities and opportunities to advance the security of our nation. I have also asked Mac to lead an initiative on cybersecurity that cuts across committee lines."

Boehner also appointed Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) to become chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, according to the statement:

As a former FBI Agent and U.S. Army Officer, Mike Rogers' experience and expertise has proven invaluable throughout his tenure on the Intelligence Committee. It is incumbent upon the Intelligence Committee to ensure that Congress and the Obama Administration are supporting our intelligence professionals and providing them with the resources and authorities they need to keep America safe, and I look forward to working with Mike in his new role as Chairman.

By John Liang
December 15, 2010 at 11:20 PM

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) and Ranking Member John McCain (R-AZ) appear to have come to an agreement regarding the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. According to a just-released joint statement:

Over the last few days, we worked closely together and then with the House of Representatives to come up with a defense bill that we believe can pass both the House and the Senate.  Because of the unique circumstances in which the bill is being considered and the importance of the legislation to our men and women serving in uniform at a time of war, we have agreed to drop many controversial provisions that were included in the House and Senate versions of the bill.

The bill includes a wide range of provisions that will provide the men and women of the armed forces and their families with the pay and benefits they deserve, ensure that they have the training and equipment they need to conduct military operations around the world, improve the management of the Department of Defense, and contribute to our national security.  It is our hope that the House and the Senate will move quickly to enact this important legislation before the end of the Congress.

No word yet on which "controversial provisions" were dropped. Stay tuned for more.

By John Liang
December 15, 2010 at 10:27 PM

Defense Secretary Robert Gates today voiced his support for passing an omnibus fiscal year 2011 spending bill:

I strongly support Congress approving an omnibus appropriation bill, rather than requiring that the Department of Defense operate under a year-long continuing resolution.

To do otherwise would leave the Department without the resources and flexibility needed to meet vital military requirements. The proposed continuing resolution would cut defense funding by about $19 billion but would not reduce or eliminate any of the additional bills we must pay in the coming year. We will need to cover the military pay raise, increases in military health care costs, higher fuel prices, and other "fact of life" bills. None of these additional costs are covered by a continuing resolution.

The omnibus would allow the Department to pursue critical national security initiatives such as standing up the new Cyber Command, increasing special operations forces, and funding family support improvements including efforts to upgrade Department of Defense schools. And the heavy volume of reprogrammings needed to manage the vast and complex operations of this Department under a year-long continuing resolution would slow our efforts to meet unanticipated wartime needs.

I urge the Congress to take these concerns into account and enact a full defense appropriations bill as part of an omnibus appropriations bill.

By John Liang
December 15, 2010 at 9:20 PM

The Project on National Security Reform today released a congressionally mandated study that recommends establishing a system to produce and manage a cadre of "National Security Professionals" who can handle complex 21st-century issues. According to a PNSR statement, the report, "The Power of People: Building an Integrated National Security Professional System for the 21st Century," recommends setting up an "Integrated National Security Professional" system "designed to function collaboratively across agency and government boundaries." Further:

PNSR believes this human capital system is urgently needed to produce and retain the necessary personnel with the requisite training and experience in whole-of-government approaches, to work in permanent, temporary, and emergency assignments. The current agency-centric system, established by Executive Order 13434 in 2007, is not robust enough to do the job. The new system must be rooted in 21st century practices of collaboration and integration, facilitated by technology, and centrally managed by a Board with a Senate-confirmed director.

Check out the report here.

By John Liang
December 15, 2010 at 6:15 PM

With Republicans taking over the House of Representatives, one can expect a different way of doing business in the people's chamber, according to Rep. Buck McKeon (CA), the incoming chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Speaking at a get-together this morning with reporters on Capitol Hill, McKeon said:

Under the new Congress, we're going to try to put more authority back into the committees; we're going to have a schedule that allows committees to function more -- you know, in this last year or two, sometimes we're in a hearing with the secretary of defense, and we have to leave to go vote to name a post office. We're going to have a lot of change in that regard, so the subcommittees will also be more enthroned, so to speak . . . The Speaker's office is not going to be telling us what to do, and we're told that we should be prepared to bring bills to the floor under open rules, so it'll be a different process than we've seen in the last few years.

By Christopher J. Castelli
December 15, 2010 at 2:50 PM

The Navy today published basing decisions for the F-35B, the Marine Corps' short-takeoff-and-vertical-landing (STOVL) version of the Joint Strike Fighter. Plans for the East Coast and West Coast, which made news locally in recent days, are formally outlined in two separate Federal Register notices.

Meanwhile, Marine Commandant Gen. James Amos told reporters Tuesday that the F-35B will not be ready by December 2012 as previously planned, noting he had hoped the program would be further along but he is not wringing his hands over the delay, according to published reports.

By John Liang
December 14, 2010 at 5:14 PM

The board of directors of the transatlantic consortium developing the Medium Extended Air Defense System has named a pair of new leaders.

David Berganini has been named president of MEADS International, and Volker Weidemann will be the new executive vice president and chief operating officer, according to a statement. On Berganini:

Berganini has 23 years of systems engineering and program management experience, and was named Chief Engineer for MEADS International in 2007.  In this role, he was responsible for Mission Success across all facets of the system/subsystem technical design and was the architect for the incremental Critical Design Review (CDR) that led to tri-national approval of the MEADS design in August 2010.  He also led the industry team working with the NATO MEADS Management Agency (NAMEADSMA) to implement a low-risk optimized program for integration and test of the advanced air and missile defense system.  Berganini was previously director of Systems Engineering at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, responsible for technical and personnel leadership and oversight of the Systems Engineering Department.

He succeeds Steve Barnoske, who led MI through successful completion of the CDR phase of the MEADS program.  Barnoske guided the program team to successful tri-national approval of the MEADS system design and set in motion an organizational transition from design to integration and test efforts.  He moves into a new leadership position in the Tactical Missiles line of business at Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control.

As for Weidemann, he replaces the retiring Klaus Reidel. Moreover:

Weidemann has served MI for the past 5 years as director of System Engineering, Integration, and Test (SEIT) and was responsible for coordinating tri-national design efforts at six development locations.  He was responsible for development and implementation of design requirements for the MEADS system and its six major end items.  During his tenure, he led the technical team through the transition from design, including a successful Preliminary Design Review and Critical Design Review, to initial build and test efforts.  Retired as an officer in the German air force, he has over 20 years of engineering management and air defense experience.  He previously served as SEIT Deputy Director and has been associated with the MEADS program for over 12 years.

Weidemann’s responsibilities as Director of System Engineering, Integration, and Test (SEIT) will pass to Norbert Wührer.  For the past three years, Wührer has led the Launcher and Reloader integrated product team based at LFK in Germany.  He has over 20 years of systems engineering expertise in air and missile defense technology, and has served as Project Manager for several Patriot efforts, including PAC-3 Missile integration and the German live firings at WSMR.

Riedel retires with extensive executive management experience on the MEADS program and will retain close ties to the program.  He previously served as President of MI and Chairman of the MI Board of Directors.

Dr. Walter Stammler, Chairman of the MEADS International Board of Directors, said, "The board appreciates the leadership that Steve and Klaus have brought to the successful MEADS design effort and development of our first major end items.  We now look to Dave and Volker to ensure successful flight tests and completion of the Design and Development contract.  MEADS International is proud that we will soon be delivering the mobile, interoperable, and affordable air and missile defense system jointly envisioned by Germany, Italy and the United States."

While a bridge contract with industry for MEADS has provided a sense of business-as-usual for the trinational project since the summer, Defense Department leaders are expected to decide by the end of this month whether they want to add nearly $600 million to the program, Inside Missile Defense reported on Dec. 1. The money is needed to bring the program's design phase to a successful close, according to officials. Further:

What could play into the decision are signals given last month at the NATO summit in Lisbon, Portugal, where alliance leaders agreed that territorial missile defense should be a core NATO military mission. Experts said the move would ultimately afford upper-layer missile defense a place as a NATO-wide program, including dedicated funding streams. That new focus, officials said, would also trigger a renewed emphasis on lower-level defense systems, of which MEADS is one, that could provide a symbolic boost to the U.S.-German-Italian project.

Adding to the debate in the three countries are newly emerging prospects of sales to countries in the market for air and missile defense systems, including Poland, Japan, Spain and Qatar, several officials confirmed.

Defense acquisition chief Ashton Carter is expected to decide by year's end whether the Pentagon would help plug a funding hole of roughly $1 billion, diagnosed last year by an Office of the Secretary of Defense-led assessment.

The cost-sharing arrangement agreed in the original MEADS memorandum of understanding for the currently design-and-development phase of the project -- 58 percent from the United states, 25 percent from Germany and 17 percent from Italy -- would remain in place, according to defense officials.

By John Liang
December 14, 2010 at 5:05 PM

The Missile Defense Advisory Committee plans to hold a classified meeting in January on the "Fiscal Year 2011 United States Ballistic Missile Defense Cooperation Study," according to a  notice posted today in the Federal Register.

The agenda of next month's meeting, set for Jan. 19 and 20, will include "briefings on Technical Ballistic Missile Defense Cooperation; Joint Missile Defense Immersion and Collaboration; Ballistic Missile Defense Situational Awareness Capability; Analysis on Integration of Ballistic Missile Defense Capabilities; Military-to-Military Engagement; Missile Defense Advisory Committee Executive Session; and Missile Defense Advisory Committee outbrief to the Director, Missile Defense Agency."

By John Liang
December 14, 2010 at 3:08 PM

The Pentagon recently asked the JASON research group to conduct a study on the theory and practice of cybersecurity, the findings of which were obtained by the Secrecy News blog. According to the report, JASON was asked to "evaluate whether there are underlying fundamental principles that would make it possible to adopt a more scientific approach, identify what is needed in creating a science of cyber-security, and recommend specific ways in which scientific methods can be applied." Further:

The need to secure computational infrastructure has become significant in all areas including those of relevance to the DOD and the intelligence community. Owing to the level of interconnection and interdependency of modern computing systems, the possibility exists that critical functions can be seriously degraded by exploiting security flaws. While the level of effort expended in securing networks and computers is significant, current approaches in this area overly rely on empiricism and are viewed to have had only limited success.

The JASON report "identifies a need to accelerate the transformation of research results into tools that can be readily used by developers. There are some very sophisticated approaches (model checking, type checking etc. as discussed previously) that can be used to assess and reason about the security of current systems, but they are not widely available today in the form of developer tools. There may be an insufficient market for private development of such tools and this may argue for a more activist role on the part of DOD in supporting future development."

Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said last week that the Defense Department must spend far more money defending its networks than hackers do attacking them, a trend that has to be reversed, Inside the Navy reports this week. Further:

"The lines of code to attack any software haven't changed in the last five years, a number of them," Cartwright said during a roundtable discussion hosted by Government Executive. "What changes is, every time we get attacked, we have to spend substantially more than they invest to protect ourselves. We've got to turn that equation around."

He said the Pentagon intends to make it much more difficult to attack its networks in the future.

Cartwright noted that that major military networks were "not designed to be defended," but were made to allow anyone to plug into them virtually anywhere and use them in myriad ways.

"We've got to change that construct to one that gives us a layered defense, gives us a non-homogenous surface, so to speak," the general said. "In other words, it is not the same when you go out. We like to see things like operating systems changed every few hours and be invisible. It makes it extremely difficult."

By John Liang
December 13, 2010 at 5:37 PM

Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter wants to strengthen ties between the Defense Department and federally funded research and development centers, according to a memo he distributed last week.

"As we implement the secretary's efficiencies, including those that are directed in my memorandum dated September 14, 2010, I believe the single most important enabler of the improvements we seek is to increase the competence, quality and performance of the acquisition workforce," Carter writes. "At the same time, we need to continue to make effective use of the other two important sources of technical, acquisition and logistics expertise available to the Department: DOD's FFRDCs, and industry contractors."

FFRDCs were set up "to provide the department with unique analytical, engineering and research capabilities in many areas where the government cannot attract and retain personnel in sufficient depth and numbers," according to the memo. They are also "free from organizational conflicts of interest and can therefore assist us in ways that industry contractors cannot. Our FFRDCs maintain core competencies in domains that continue to be of great importance to the Department. These are immensely valuable capabilities, and the Department should use all means available to preserve and strengthen them," Carter writes. Consequently:

In recognition of the unique role that FFRDCs play in fulfilling our critical needs, we establish long-term relationships between the Government and the FFRDCs in order to attract and retain high-quality and knowledgeable personnel to the FFRDCs. As a result, we should employ contracting methodologies that provide the strongest long-term strategic relationships with our FFRDCs. We are working with the FFRDC sponsors to identify the most effective contracting strategies to support these long-term strategic relationships consistent with law and regulation. Use of any of these contracting strategies will be supported by vigorous sponsor comprehensive reviews conducted every five years, and a strengthened annual review of each FFRDC, conducted by my office, thereby ensuring that we have robust program management and oversight of these capabilities to ensure they are fulfilling their intended purposes.

By Cid Standifer
December 10, 2010 at 10:35 PM

The Navy successfully broke its previous record for highest-joule projectile shot with the Electromagnetic Rail Gun, part of its vision for future high-tech ship weaponry, at Dahlgren today.

Navy officials are psyched about the rail gun because it would run off electricity instead of explosives, taking up less space on board a ship and taking away the risks that come with carrying volatile materials on a sea-bound vessel. The rail gun would use the pure kinetic energy of a javelin fired from an electrified rail to demolish its target.

The shot today was powered by 33 mega-joules of electricity, breaking the record set on Jan. 31, 2008, when the Navy fired a rail gun at 10 mega-joules.

According to a Navy press release, the rail gun will eventually be able to fire a projectile 200 nautical miles at Mach 7.

Most importantly, the Navy has posted a YouTube movie that includes slow-motion video of the shot.

By John Liang
December 10, 2010 at 4:46 PM

Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) today announced she is ready to support the Obama administration in ratifying the follow-on Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. Her support comes in the wake of the administration's addressing of her "concerns about the disparity between Russia's large stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons compared to the much smaller number in the United States' arsenal," according to a statement from her office.

Last week, Senator Collins sent a letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Defense Secretary Robert Gates asking for information on the White House's plan to address the difference in the number of tactical nuclear weapons between the two countries. "Independent experts estimate Russia has at least 3,800 of this type of nuclear warheads, and press reports indicate that the Russians have moved some of these weapons closer to their border with Europe," her statement reads. The senator's letter states:

By maintaining a distinction between the threats of nuclear attack that warrant the ratification of a treaty from those nuclear threats that do not simply based up on the distance from which a nuclear attack is launched or the method by which such a weapon is delivered, we preserve an outdated model regarding the nuclear threats facing our country. The characteristics of tactical nuclear weapons, particularly their vulnerability for theft and misuse for nuclear terrorism, make reducing their numbers important now.

In response, Clinton and Gates wrote that "the administration is committed to seeking improved security of, and reductions in, Russian tactical (also known as non-strategic) nuclear weapons."  Further: "We strongly agree with you that the characteristics of tactical nuclear weapons -- particularly their vulnerability to theft, misuse, or acquisition by terrorists -- make reducing their numbers and enhancing their safety and security extremely important."

That appears to have been enough for Collins, who in her statement said:

The New START represents a continued effort to achieve mutual and verifiable reductions in nuclear weapons.  As the Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I support the President's commitment to reduce not only the number of strategic nuclear weapons through the New START treaty, but also to reduce, in the future, those weapons that are most vulnerable to theft and misuse -- and those are tactical nuclear weapons.

By John Liang
December 9, 2010 at 7:18 PM

The Pentagon recently released a report on its plan to improve its business operations.

Dubbed the "Fiscal Year 2011 Enterprise Transition Plan," the report "focuses specifically on those business systems that are new or being modernized and provides the Department's roadmap accordingly. It identifies the governance and strategic framework DoD uses to manage its investments, describes how those investments are part of the Department's overarching management reform efforts, outlines key improvement initiatives for FY11 and provides specific information regarding each of its business system investments." Further:

The imperative to improve the Department’s business operations has never been greater. Secretary of Defense Gates and Deputy Secretary Lynn have clearly articulated the pressing need for reform, driving action across all business areas such as acquisition and logistics, finance, real property and personnel. The people and processes that make up each of these business areas are supported by the Department’s backbone of business Information Technology (IT). As current technology becomes obsolete, the Department must make targeted investments to modernize its existing business systems or develop and field new ones.

In FY11, the Department expects to spend nearly $7 billion on business systems. Approximately two-thirds of this amount is to sustain existing systems and one-third is for development or modernization efforts.

By John Liang
December 9, 2010 at 4:55 PM

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin spoke on the Senate floor this morning in favor of passing the long-awaited fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill. Here are some excerpts from an "unofficial" transcript of Levin's remarks released by his office:

. . . It will provide our troops with the equipment and support they need to continue on the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. For example, the bill would enhance the military's ability to rapidly acquire and field new capability and respond to urgent needs on the battlefield by expanding the department of defense's authority to waive statutory requirements when needed to save lives on the battlefield. The bill will fund the president's request for $11.6 billion to train the Afghan army and police to prepare them to take over by the July 2011 date established by the president for the beginning of reductions in U.S. forces at that time.

The bill will extend for one more year the authority for the Department of Defense to transfer equipment coming out of Iraq as our troops withdraw -- and to transfer that equipment to the security forces of Iraq and Afghanistan providing an important tool for our commanders looking to accelerate the growth and capability of these security forces. The bill would promote the Department of Defense's cybersecurity and energy security efforts, two far-reaching initiatives that should strengthen our national defense and our nation.

If we fail to act on this bill, madam president, we will not be able to provide the Department of Defense with critical new authority and extensions of existing authorities that it needs to safeguard our national security. For example, without this bill the Department of Defense will either lose the authority that it requested to support counter-drug activities of foreign governments, use premium pay to encourage civilian employees to accept dangerous assignments in Iraq and Afghanistan and provide assistance to the Yemeni counterterrorism unit. It could have serious consequences for the success or failure of ongoing military operations around the world.

. . . Now, despite the differing views over [the Don't Ask Don't Tell provision] and other provisions where there are differences of opinion, we should not deny the Senate the opportunity to take up this bill, which is so essential for the men and women in the military, because we disagree with some provisions of the bill. These are legitimate issues for debate. And I believe the Senate should debate them. But the only way we can debate and vote on these issues is if the Senate proceeds to the bill. The disputed provisions can be addressed through the amendment process.

. . . We have currently 50,000 U.S. Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines on the ground in Iraq and twice that many, roughly, in Afghanistan. While there are some issues on which we may disagree, we all know that we must provide our troops with the support that they need as long as they remain in harm's way. Senate action on the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2011 will improve the quality of life of our men and women in uniform. It will give them the tools that they need to remain the most effective fighting force in the world. And, most importantly of all, it will send an important message that we, as a nation, stand behind them and appreciate their service.

Now, Madam President, this bill runs some -- excuse me -- some 850 pages. the House bill -- the counterpart bill -- runs more than 1,000 pages. Even if we get 60 votes today to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to this bill, and even if we're able to consider amendments and pass this bill in a few days, it will be a possibly insurmountable challenge to work out all of the differences with the House.

Over the last 10 years, Madam President, it has taken an average of 75 days to conference the Defense Authorization Bill with the house after we pass it. If we don't proceed on this bill this week, then invoking cloture sometime next week, even if we can do it, it would be a symbolic victory. And I don't believe that there would be enough time to hammer out a final bill before the end of this session.

I don't believe in symbolic victories. This bill is a victory for the people in uniform. It's essential for the people in uniform. We should not act symbolically in their name and for their sake we should act in reality. But the only way that this will be real and that the repeal of “don't ask, don't” tell, assuming we continue to keep it in the bill, will be real is if we proceed to the bill this week. We cannot and should not delay this vote any longer. I thank the Presiding Officer. I yield the floor and note the absence of a quorum.