The Insider

The Pentagon's inspector general is reviewing whether combatant commands such as U.S. Pacific Command receive sufficient cyber personnel and support from U.S. Cyber Command to effectively conduct cyber operations in their areas of operations, according to a recent memo that launched assessment.

The review -- dubbed "Audit of Mission Resourcing for the Cyber Operations at Combatant Commands" -- will take place at CYBERCOM in Maryland, PACOM in Hawaii and perhaps other locations. No other COCOMs are mentioned, but the memo adds, "We may identify additional Joint Cyber Centers during the audit." The Dec. 9 memo was released this week by the IG's office.

Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel recently underscored the growing importance of the cyber domain. "Cyber threats are real," he told reporters Dec. 4. "Five years ago, it wasn't the same dimension as we now see."

The Congressional Budget Office today released its annual review of U.S. nuclear weapons spending, projecting total expenditures for the next six years.

The report, called for by Congress in the fiscal year 2013 Defense Authorization Act, estimates "the costs over the next 10 years of the Administration’s plans for operating, maintaining, and modernizing nuclear weapons and the military systems capable of delivering those weapons."

The numbers are huge. From the report's summary:

Between 2014 and 2023, the costs of the Administration’s plans for nuclear forces will total $355 billion, in CBO’s estimation. Of that total, $296 billion represents CBO’s projection of the amounts budgeted for strategic and tactical nuclear delivery systems ($136 billion over 10 years); for nuclear weapons, DOE’s nuclear weapons enterprise, and SSBN nuclear reactors ($105 billion over 10 years); and for nuclear command, control, communications, and early-warning systems ($56 billion over 10 years). The remaining $59 billion of the total represents CBO’s estimate of the additional costs that will ensue over the coming decade, beyond the budgeted amounts, if the nuclear programs experience cost growth at the same average rate that similar programs have experienced in the past.

In addition to operating and maintaining current systems, DoD and DOE plan to modernize or replace many weapons and delivery systems over the next few decades. Planned nuclear modernization programs include new SSBNs, long-range bombers, ICBMs, and cruise missiles, as well as major life-extending refurbishments of current ICBMs, submarine-launched ballistic missiles, and nearly all nuclear warheads. Of the $241 billion budgeted for nuclear delivery systems and weapons over the next 10 years (combining the $136 billion and $105 billion figures in the preceding paragraph), CBO estimates that $152 billion would be spent to field and maintain the current generation of systems and $89 billion would be spent to modernize or replace those systems. Because most of those modernization efforts are just beginning, annual costs for nuclear forces are expected to increase.

From 2021 to 2023, nuclear costs would average about $29 billion annually, roughly 60 percent higher than the $18 billion requested for 2014. Annual costs are likely to continue to grow after 2023 as production begins on replacement systems.

The Senate moments ago passed the budget agreement, paving the way for consideration of the fiscal year 2014 defense authorization agreement, according to a tweet from the Periodical Press Gallery:

Senate Periodicals @SenatePPG

Motion to concur H. J. Res 59 (Budget Agreement) AGREED to by 64-36. Now vote on Cloture on H. R. 3304 (DoD Authorization)

The White House has announced plans to nominate Eric Rosenbach, the deputy assistant secretary of defense for cyber policy, to be assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense. In his new role as the Pentagon's top homeland defense official, Rosenbach would bring years of experience with cybersecurity and counterterrorism policy matters and oversee a new incarnation of the homeland defense office, which was recently reorganized by Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel in an overhaul of the Pentagon's policy shop.

The overhaul put policy for cyber, space and countering weapons of mass destruction under the assistant secretary for homeland defense, creating what Hagel termed a more comprehensive approach to homeland defense. Provided he is confirmed by the Senate, Rosenbach would oversee four deputy assistant secretaries of defense: homeland defense integration and defense support of civil authorities; defense continuity and mission assurance; countering weapons of mass destruction; and cyber and space policy.

Rosenbach has served in his current post since 2011. Previously, he was principal and global cybersecurity practice lead at Good Harbor Consulting. From 2007 to 2010, he was the executive director of the Belfer Center for International Affairs at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, where he also taught classes on cybersecurity, counterterrorism and international policy analysis. He was a policy adviser for President Obama’s 2008 campaign and has ties to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel. From 2005 to 2007, he advised then-Sen. Hagel (R-NE) while serving on the staff of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) today released his annual report on wasteful government spending. Here are some military-related highlights.

Weapons Destruction:

As the U.S. war effort in the Middle East winds to a close, the military has destroyed more than 170 million pounds worth of useable vehicles and other military equipment. The military has decided that it will simply destroy more than $7 billion worth of equipment rather than sell it or ship it back home.

Army National Guard vs Superman:

The Army National Guard's budget did not fare as well as Superman's. As a result of the spending restraints imposed by the Budget Control Act of 2011, "the Army may have to reduce at least 100,000 additional personnel across the Total Force – the Active Army, the Army National Guard and the Army Reserve. When coupled with previously planned cuts to end strength, the Army could lose up to 200,000 soldiers over the next ten years," according to Army leadership.

Yet, the Army still spent $10 million to subsidize the promotion of Superman with the hopes of enlisting new recruits. This money could have been better spent on the real life supermen and superwomen in the Army National Guard who are courageously risking all in the fight for truth, justice, and the American way.

As Superman flies away with massive profits from sponsors and ticket sales and the force size and budget of the Army National Guard shrinks, the U.S. national debt continues to go up, up and away.

C-27J Spartans:

The Air Force is clipping the wings of brand new planes before they ever take their maiden flight.

Since 2007, the U.S. Air Force has purchased 21 C-27J Spartans at a cost of $631.4 million to U.S. taxpayers.

According to its manufacturer, Italian aerospace company Aleniana Aermacchi, the C-27J was designed to provide tactical transport to support combat operations in remote and austere environments. The C-27J, which has supported combat operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, can take off and land from unimproved surfaces and airstrips less than 2,000 feet in length. The C-27J offers "superior and cost-effective performances in any operational condition, extreme mission flexibility, and is uniquely interoperable and interchangeable with heavier military airlifters."

However, in 2012, the Air Force determined that the C-27J did not offer superior capability and capacity to perform general support and direct support airlift missions. The C-27J in fact could only perform the direct support mission and could not match the capability of the C-130 in respect to range, cargo, and passenger transportation.

In August 2012, a former Air Force Chief of Staff testified before Congress that the Air Force did not want to acquire more C-27Js due to fiscal constraints brought by sequestration, the C-27J's limited capabilities, and because the C-130 was more cost effective than the C-27J (the C-27J costing the Air Force $270 million, while the C-130 costs between $204 and $216 million when taking in consideration the current basing construct for the C-27J and C-130).

Contrary to the request by the Air Force to stop production of the planes, and even as it knew the planes would never be used, Congress continued to fund C-27J production in the Fiscal Year 2012 National Defense Authorization Act. After taking its existing C-27Js out of service, the Air Force was then allowed to mothball its brand new C-27Js at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Tucson, Arizona -- 16 new C-27Js in September 2013 and an additional five in 2014 -- before these aircraft took a single flight in support of our service members, according to a Dayton Daily News investigative report. Making matters worse, the DOD plans to mothball five brand new C-27Js which are expected to be built by April 2014, adding to waste of approximately 4,400 unused aircraft and 13 aerospace vehicles from the DOD and NASA, mothballed, with a total value of more than $35 billion.

MRAPs:

Everyone knows that Ohio State University football games can get wild, but campus cops may have finally taken things too far. Using a Defense Department program, the school along with dozens of other police jurisdictions, are receiving some of the military’s surplus armored vehicles.

At a cost of $500,000 each, U.S. taxpayers gifted $82.5 million in surplus Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) tactical vehicles to law enforcement agencies in 165 communities, including dozens of rural and sparsely populated regions. Intended for large-scale emergencies, MRAPs are equipped with machine gun turrets, bulletproof glass, and armored siding.

From Bates County, Missouri to High Springs, Florida, local law enforcement agencies in rural and small-town communities are being equipped with the same military-grade tools that U.S. troops utilized to fight the War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Some local residents have objected, noting the weapons of war seem out of place here at home. However, said one recipient county sheriff, "It's intimidating. And it's free." Provided by taxpayers' generosity, the same vehicles strong enough to protect U.S. troops from roadside bombs and machine gun fire and rockets are now being used "to deliver shock and awe while serving warrants" in quiet communities across America through the LESO 1033 Program.

One rural sheriff justified his need for an MRAP by describing, in his view, what a war zone rural America has become. "While this vehicle may be extreme for Bates County to some people, I would call their attention to what is going on in rural areas across the country. Workplace shootings, school shootings, and violence in general are not just big city problems" said the sheriff of Bates County, Missouri (population 16,709).

Demand for the free vehicles has been high, though, with the Department of Defense receiving requests for 731 additional MRAPs, from local law enforcement agencies across the nation. The Warren County (NY) sheriff who was one of the lucky few to land one said he doubts they will even use it that much saying it will probably "spend most of the time in a heated garage."

The Ohio State University police chief reassured students the MRAP will only be utilized for emergencies that occur on the campus, such as officer (not student) rescues, hostage situations, bomb threats, active shooter scenarios, and homeland security purposes. "It's a more special vehicle than the typical armored vehicle. This one can go through water."

A commission on the Air Force plans to hold the final of a series of meetings this week in Arlington, VA, to discuss the service's future force structure and "finalize and write recommendations," according to a Federal Register notice published this morning.

The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force will meet for the fifth time on Dec. 17 in closed session "to consider information and data from a variety of sources that will be presented and aggregated by employing several data, analytic and decision support tools that contain classified information."

The meeting's agenda items include:

-- The role of airpower in the post-Afghanistan national security situations likely to be encountered by the Air Force capabilities and Airmen and the implications for the structure of the Air Force. This discussion will be organized into three categories. The "Away Game," will involve emerging demands on Air Force capabilities such as: Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance, Remotely Piloted Aircraft, Space, Cyber, Special Operations, and Building Partnership Capacity. Commissioners will also explore the implications of rising demands and expectations for the "Home Game" in missions such as Homeland Defense, Homeland Security, and Defense Support to Civil Agencies. This will include implications for the structure of the Air Force from the growing threat of the "Away Game" involving simultaneous attacks on the Homeland. The third area of discussion will be on the continuing growth of demand on traditional Air Force core functions including: Air Superiority, Air Mobility, Global Precision Attack, Nuclear Deterrence Operations, Command and Control, Personnel Recovery, Agile Combat Support, Training and Education, and other specific mission sets such as security forces, civil engineering and science and technology.

-- Projections and assumptions about future resource levels that will be available to organize, train and equip the Air Force. This will include assumptions about how the Budget Control Act and Sequestration legislation will affect Total Obligational Authority and associated planning, programming and budgeting flexibility. Commissioners will also consider the impact of strategic choices on Air Force capabilities and force structure options derived from the selection of national priorities among modernization, technology, recapitalization, readiness, capacity and force structure. In this discussion Commissioners will consider the various approaches to how to calculate and apply cost methods and data to questions of force structure.

-- The root causes of legislative and bureaucratic development of the force structure issues that led to the creation of the Commission in 2013. They will consider how these issues are rooted in the American militia heritage and the history of the Air Force since 1947. This discussion will extend to accounting for the socio-cultural dimensions of force structure issues ranging from the fundamental relationship of the American people to their military and to sub-cultures within the Air Force.

-- How to institutionalize the shift in the fundamental role of the reserve components from a strategic reserve to an operational reserve with associated expectations. Commissioners will also consider the force mix options they are prepared to assess in terms of relative weight of force structure in each of the components. Commissioners will consider whether to recommend that the Department of Defense invert the force sizing planning paradigm from sizing to meet the expected wartime surge to an approach that begins with the Steady State Requirement then resource the components to provide the nation with a meaningful surge capacity for the strategy. They will also address considerations for measuring and assessing Active, Reserve and Guard Effectiveness -- both cost and mission effectiveness.

-- Alternative approaches to how the nation should direct, control and guide the active, reserve and National Guard Air Forces, including:

* Whether, and if so how, to simplify Title 10, Title 32 and other governing legislative authorities;

* How to re-balance the current mix of Active, Reserve and Guard components into and across any and all mission functions;

* Whether, and if so how, to reorganize the Air Force Active, Reserve and National Guard into less than 3 components;

* Can the Air Force move to a periodic readiness schedule without creating a "hollow force;"

* Does component "ownership" of aircraft matter anymore and how can the Associate Unit paradigm be adapted to the future;

* Approaching future force integration of new systems capabilities by means of a Concurrent Proportional resourcing method across the components to replace today's priority of equipping the Active Component first;

* Accelerating the adoption of a "Continuum of Service" model to facilitate the ability of Airmen to move from any component into another at multiple points in their career path without prejudice;

* Enhancing the total force through equalized opportunities across the components for professional and technical education and shared experiences.

* Recognizing in promotion and selection processes differing but equivalent ends, ways, and means of professional development;

* Fundamental shift in policy goals for "Deploy-to-Dwell," "Mobilization-to-Dwell," and associated metrics for the post-Afghanistan period, as well as how deployment credit will be accounted.

* Reconsider the nation's needs for Overseas Basing and the capacity of continental United States' infrastructure afforded by investments in Reserve and Guard basing capacities available to the Total Force.

Capitol Hill's proposed two-year budget deal would “mitigate” the Air Force's near-term readiness problems, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh told reporters today at the Pentagon. “It's at the top of our payback list,” he said.

Air Force Under Secretary Eric Fanning, meanwhile, said service officials have not fully sorted through how the budget compromise, if passed, would impact the Defense Department as a whole.

“What it does for the Air Force, whatever funds become available to us, does alleviate the readiness problems,” he said at the same press conference. “It doesn't fix them, but helps us with them in '14 and '15.”

Further, he said, “it's going to take us a while to dig out of the readiness bathtub that we're in. So we won't face the same problems in '16 that we would without this relief, but we won't have our readiness problem fixed then by any means.”