The Insider

President Obama today marked the 40th anniversary of a major arms control agreement with a statement that ties the old with the new -- as in ongoing talks with Russia on a new START treaty, among other efforts:

Forty years ago today, in the midst of a Cold War, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) entered into force, becoming the cornerstone of the world’s efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. Today, the threat of global nuclear war has passed, but the danger of nuclear proliferation endures, making the basic bargain of the NPT more important than ever: nations with nuclear weapons will move toward disarmament, nations without nuclear weapons will forsake them, and all nations have an “inalienable right” to peaceful nuclear energy.

Each of these three pillars -- disarmament, nonproliferation and peaceful uses -- are central to the vision that I outlined in Prague of stopping the spread of nuclear weapons and seeking a world without them.

To promote disarmament, the United States is working with Russia to complete negotiations on a new START Treaty that will significantly reduce our nuclear arsenals. Our forthcoming Nuclear Posture Review will move beyond outdated Cold War thinking and reduce the number and role of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy, even as we maintain a safe, secure and effective nuclear deterrent. In addition, we will seek to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and negotiate a treaty to end the production of fissile material for use in nuclear weapons.

To prevent proliferation, we will build on the historic resolution that we achieved at the United Nations Security Council last September by bringing together more than 40 nations at our Nuclear Security Summit next month with the goal of securing the world’s vulnerable nuclear materials in four years. At this spring’s treaty review conference and beyond, we will continue to work with allies and partners to strengthen the NPT and to enforce the rights and responsibilities of every nation, because the world cannot afford additional proliferation or regional arms races.

. . . It took years of focused effort among many nations to bring the NPT into force four decades ago and to sustain it as the most widely embraced nuclear agreement in history. On this 40th anniversary, the United States reaffirms our resolve to strengthen the nonproliferation regime to meet the challenges of the 21st century as we pursue our ultimate vision of a world without nuclear weapons.

“U.S. foreign policy is still too dominated by the military,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen said Wednesday in a much-publicized speech at Kansas State University.

It is too dependent upon the generals and admirals who lead major overseas commands, he said, adding, “It’s one thing to be able and willing to serve as emergency responders; quite another to always have to be the fire chief.”

The full speech is online.

The co-chairs of the Senate National Guard Caucus are calling on Defense Secretary Robert Gates to nominate a new Army National Guard director.

In a March 3 letter, senators Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Kit Bond (R-MO) write that the "vacuum of leadership at the three-star level places the Army National Guard at a disadvantage, not only in the day-to-day decision making process inside the Army, but also during deliberations regarding future budget, force structure, equipping, and personnel issues.

"If this vacancy in senior-level leadership and advocacy is allowed to persist, the future decisions may be made in ways disproportionately and inappropriately disadvantageous to the strength and capabilities of the Army National Guard within the Total Force," the document warns.

The president of the National Guard Association today released a statement backing the senators' effort. "Ten months would be a long time for the Army National Guard to go without a director even in peacetime," writes retired Maj. Gen. Gus Hargett. "But we are a nation at war. We rely on the Army National Guard every day -- at home and abroad."

He notes that Maj. Gen. Ray Carpenter is acting director of the Army Guard.

"General Carpenter is doing an outstanding job under difficult circumstances, but he is a two-star general functioning in an interim capacity," Hargett writes. "The Army National Guard urgently needs a permanent, three-star director."

Because so much at the Defense Department depends on contractors, Pentagon leaders fear the work of private contractors may not get done during times of crises. That is why Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn issued a memo last week relaying new acquisition regulation language that would ensure defense contractors craft some kind of fall-back plans for continued operations if, say, an influenza epidemic would afflict large portions of the population.

The Feb. 26 memo tasks DOD's contracting officers to weed through their contracts and determine which services should be considered “critical to the support of mission essential functions that, if interrupted, may seriously impair the government.” Where applicable, a new clause must be added to contracts and solicitations, Lynn wrote.

Retired Marine Corps Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper appeared before the Senate Budget Committee last week to offer his views on the defense budget and the Quadrennial Defense Review. Van Riper sits on a congressionally mandated commission charged with critiquing the Pentagon's recently released QDR, so his opinions on these topics carry some weight in defense circles.

One of Van Riper's criticisms centered around the training and education of those in uniform.

I find strong evidence in the defense budget request that it supports both acquisition and refurbishing of needed weapons and equipment. Unfortunately, I cannot find the same support for the professional education and training essential to reacquiring and building the knowledge and skills required to fight regular nation- state enemies. The joint forces and the Services too often look to training and education accounts as bill payers when funds and personnel are short in other areas.

Van Riper also had candid advice for countering what Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND) dubbed an “utterly unsustainable course” in federal spending, a large part of which goes to the Defense Department and, more specifically, to the Military Health System.

“I started from humble circumstances . . . I worked hard both as a Marine and since retirement," Van Riper said. "But my wife and I are blessed that we probably, in terms of income, are in the top 3 percent of the citizens. You need to tax us; you need to tax all of us more. So you need to pass health care reform because you won't fix military health care until you fix health care reform in general."

President Obama yesterday changed the order of succession within the Defense Department, reversing revisions made by the Bush administration in 2005, when Donald Rumsfeld was the defense secretary.

The 2005 guidance put the under secretaries of defense for intelligence, policy and acquisition matters ahead of the secretaries of the Army, Air Force and Navy. But Obama has restored the service secretaries to the spots just behind the deputy defense secretary. The Army secretary is third in line, followed by his counterparts in the Navy and Air Force.

Obama issued an executive order to make the change, just as his predecessor did in 2005.

The Obama administration's push to kill unnecessary, troubled weapons programs has launched a new era at the Pentagon, Deputy Defense Secretary William Lynn said today.

"We have a lot on our plate," he said at an American Legion conference. "And in this fiscal climate, we simply can't afford to waste defense dollars. So we have begun a new era of greater accountability at the Pentagon. The poor performance of programs and budgets will not be tolerated -- nor will advocating for systems and weapons that we don't need."

Last year the Defense Department canceled or curtailed lower-priority or under-performing programs that would have cost taxpayers $330 billion, Lynn said, noting this year DOD wants to cut seven more major systems.

"The department needs to be a smarter buyer,” Lynn added. "To ensure the warfighter gets the best equipment and support we can provide, we are strengthening and enlarging our acquisition workforce. We are bringing in-house much of the expertise we used to contract out. And as directed by new bipartisan legislation, we will rely on cost estimates conducted by independent parties."