The Insider

A bilateral protocol for the new U.S.-Russian follow-on agreement to the cooperative threat reduction program, announced by President Obama earlier this week, reveals the kind of compromise Moscow and Washington leaders have struck on the previously thorny issue of liabilities.

According to the document, released by the State Department today, American personnel engaged in nonproliferation work under the new agreement are immune from prosecution by Russian authorities unless the Russians believe that those individuals willingly caused an accident "with intent to cause personal injury, loss of life, or damage."

In such a case, officials from both countries will hold "prompt consultations and attempt to achieve a mutual understanding" within 90 days of Russian notification. If a mutual understanding cannot be reached, immunity clauses covering the accused individuals would no longer apply, according to the protocol.

The protocol is applied "provisionally" beginning on June 17, 2013 and will enter into force once both countries have completed the necessary “internal procedures,” the document reads.

The National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force plans to hold a meeting next week, according to a notice published in this morning's Federal Register:

Purpose of Meeting: The members of the Commission will hear testimony from individual witnesses and then will discuss the information presented at the hearings.

Agenda: Consultants, representatives from defense think tanks, and leadership from the National Governors Association are invited to speak at the public hearing and are asked to address matters pertaining to the U.S. Air Force, the Air National Guard, and the U.S. Air Force Reserve such as their study results and recommendations. These witnesses are also asked to address the evaluation factors under consideration by the Commission for a U.S. Air Force structure that -- (a) Meets current and anticipated requirements of the combatant commands; (b) achieves an appropriate balance between the regular and reserve components of the Air Force, taking advantage of the unique strengths and capabilities of each; (c) ensures that the regular and reserve components of the Air Force have the capacity needed to support current and anticipated homeland defense and disaster assistance missions in the United States; (d) provides for sufficient numbers of regular members of the Air Force to provide a base of trained personnel from which the personnel of the reserve components of the Air Force could be recruited; (e) maintains a peacetime rotation force to support operational tempo goals of 1:2 for regular members of the Air Forces and 1:5 for members of the reserve components of the Air Force; and (f) maximizes and appropriately balances affordability, efficiency, effectiveness, capability, and readiness. Individual Commissioners will also report their activities, information collection, and analyses to the full Commission.

The meeting will take place on June 26 from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., according to the notice.

The expected changes to the service's force structure has lawmakers understandably worried. Inside the Air Force reported last week that a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee had drawn up an amendment to the panel's fiscal year 2014 defense authorization bill that would freeze some force structure changes proposed by the Air Force and already approved by Congress until next summer:

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS), the ranking member of the Senate Armed Services airland subcommittee, described the amendment during the subcommittee's brief mark-up session this morning. The amendment would prevent the "transfer, conveyance or divestment" of any Air Force intra-theater airlift assets until 120 days after the National Commission on the Structure of the Air Force submits its report to Congress.

That report is due next February, meaning that Wicker's proposal would stop the transfer or other adjustment of the service's C-130 and C-27 aircraft fleets until around June 2014.

Wicker voiced his displeasure with the way Congress approved the Air Force's total force plan (TFP), a revision to the service's original FY-13 budget request that recommended retiring hundreds of aircraft, during a House-Senate conference last year over the FY-13 Defense Authorization Act. The TFP reduced the number of aircraft recommended for retirement and attempted to bring new missions to units losing aircraft but still centered on doing away with or re-basing many legacy intra-theater aircraft.

"I remain deeply concerned about the fiscal year 2013 defense authorization conference decision made behind closed doors and without consultation of all conferees that enabled the Air Force to begin implementation of its total force plan," he said. "I'm convinced that some elements of the TFP were shortsighted and may adversely impact our intra-theater airlift capability."

President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin have signed a new cooperative threat reduction umbrella agreement, the two leaders announced today.

According to a White House transcript of comments made after a bilateral meeting in Northern Ireland, Obama said:

And one of the concrete outcomes of this meeting is that we'll be signing here the continuation of the cooperation that was first established through the Nunn-Lugar program to counter potential threats of proliferation and to enhance nuclear security.

And this I think is an example of the kind of constructive, cooperative relationship that moves us out of a Cold War mindset into the realm where, by working together, we not only increase security and prosperity for the Russian and American people, but also help lead the world to a better place.

Last month, Inside the Pentagon reported that if the previous agreement, which expired today, was not amended or renewed, it could impact many of the Defense Department's joint threat reduction efforts, according to a March 22 "for-official-use-only" report signed by Madelyn Creedon, the assistant secretary of defense for global strategic affairs. ITP reviewed this report. Many of the joint threat reduction efforts cannot continue as planned without adequate legal coverage, Creedon wrote.

ITP further reported on the Creedon missive:

"Although Russia has increased its share of joint projects, significant gaps remain," Creedon states. "Recognizing that the gains from our strong cooperation to date are reversible, the United States seeks to continue cooperation and is in discussions with Russia regarding a framework to continue our successful joint efforts beyond June 2013."

"If, however, a new agreement with adequate legal protections is not concluded, the United States will determine which projects must cease operation and will shut them down in an orderly fashion," she continues.

The ITP story also had comments from various analysts on the issues that arose during negotiations:

Ken Luongo, president of the Partnership for Global Security, said negotiations on the new agreement focus on the fact that Russia wants to be more of a partner in the effort, instead of a recipient. However, he questioned "what that means in practical terms" because the Russians don't have similar programs to those of the United States. He also questioned whether Russia would spend the same amount of money as the United States, which he said came to more than $1 billion a year. "Partnership indicates some equality, not 'We don't want to be a [recipient], but by the same token we want you to spend all of the money,'" Luongo said.

Tom Collina, research director at the Arms Control Association, said another big issue being debated is liability. U.S. contractors do a lot of the work under the agreement, but if something goes awry, they would not be held liable, Collina said, noting Russia wanted to renegotiate that.

Luongo said there's not too much work left to do in Russia because a lot of projects have been completed and were related to the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.

U.S. Africa Command announced today it "is seeking information about, and expressions of interest by, organizations, associations, and other entities, both public and private, which are currently working on the West, East, and North Coasts of Africa in the areas of maritime domain awareness and maritime security."

In a Federal Register notice, AFRICOM states that such information "and expressions of interest in observing the aforementioned exercises is being solicited to inform USAFRICOM and African Host Nations of potential public and private sector capability to improve maritime security. It is expected that these private entities will enrich the exercises planned in Africa concerning maritime awareness and maritime security on the West, East, and North coasts of Africa." Further, according to the notice:

Specifically, USAFRICOM seeks to include a limited number of local, national, and international public and private organizations, associations, and entities as observers into the USAFRICOM Express Series Exercises in order to familiarize U.S. forces and Host Nation Maritime forces with public and private entities which are often the first affected by maritime domain awareness and/or maritime security issues. USAFRICOM and African Host Nation Maritime forces seek to understand the objectives, capabilities, operating procedures, coordination processes, and information sharing tools of these organizations, associations, and entities. USAFRICOM and African Host Nation Maritime forces desire to eventually build collaborative relationships with non-federal entities and promote a sustainable unity of effort among these stakeholder public and private organizations, associations, and entities. Finally, USAFRICOM and African Host Nation Maritime forces desire to eliminate gaps in response, set standard operating processes and procedures for interaction, and promote understanding within the multi-faceted community of key maritime stakeholders.

Inside the Navy reports this week that a new Marine Corps crisis response team that falls under the control of AFRICOM is being based at Morón Air Base in Spain while the service continues to assess the appropriate location for the unit:

A special purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force for crisis response (SP-MAGTF CR) is a rotational contingent of approximately 500 Marines, sailors and support elements. The unit is capable of responding to a broad range of military operations and will provide limited defense crisis response of U.S. embassies in the region, support non-combatant evacuation operations, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief operations or provide tactical recovery of aircraft and personnel, Marine Corps spokesman Capt. Eric Flanagan wrote in a June 4 email.

The Spanish government agreed to temporarily host the unit. The Marine Corps and Spanish government will reassess the location on a year-by-year basis. Other locations could be elsewhere in Spain or somewhere in Europe, he added.

The State Department works with host countries on basing situations while U.S. European Command acts as the liaison between the embassy and the Defense Department, a Marine Forces Africa spokesman wrote in a June 6 email. . . .

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. James Amos proposed the special purpose MAGTF specifically tailored for crisis response in Africa. Forward-basing in Europe would increase the capability of the crisis-response team to rapidly respond to incidents on the continent, then-AFRICOM chief Gen. Carter Ham wrote in testimony submitted March 7 to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

The Government Accountability Office today denied Beechcraft Corp.'s protest of a long-delayed Air Force contract for the production of a fleet of light-attack aircraft for the Afghan military.

Beechcraft launched the protest after a team of Sierra Nevada Corp. and Brazil's Embraer obtained the right to build 20 A-29 Super Tucano aircraft and deliver them to Afghanistan beginning in mid-2014. Sierra Nevada and Embraer said in a June 13 joint statement that GAO's decision was "a win" for U.S. allies in Afghanistan.

In its own statement, Beechcraft said:

It is deeply distressing that the Air Force selected a more expensive, less capable, foreign-manufactured airplane with weapons and systems unfamiliar to, and outside the control of, the United States military. We have known that the requirements for this procurement were written to favor the competition’s aircraft. During this protest, we learned that the GAO's review looks only at whether the Air Force followed its process, but not whether the process itself was actually correct or appropriate. We question whether the Embraer aircraft with its foreign-made weapons can be certified to U.S. military standards in time to provide the mission-capable aircraft per the contract.

It is now time for Congress to step in and put an end to this flawed acquisition process and limit the purchase of the Brazilian aircraft to only that of the Afghanistan requirement covered by the first delivery order of the LAS contract.

Beechcraft remains confident that the AT-6, which was rated "Exceptional" by the Air Force, was the better choice for LAS and is the best aircraft for U.S. partner nations in need of light attack aircraft. The company is certain that future procurements, including those run by other governments, will validate this rating and result in the selection of the AT-6 for counterinsurgency and irregular warfare missions.

For more on this dispute, check out Inside the Air Force's recent coverage:

Court Rejects Lawsuit, Gives Air Force Green Light To Build Afghan Planes
(Inside the Air Force, April 26, 2013)

Beechcraft Corp. Files Lawsuit, Aims To Halt Production Of Afghan Aircraft
(DefenseAlert, March 21, 2013)

Lawmakers Ask Defense Secretary To Countermand Air Force Decision On Aircraft For Afghanistan
(DefenseAlert, March 18, 2013)

Air Force Gives Sierra Nevada The Green Light On Afghan Aircraft Build
(DefenseAlert, March 15, 2013)

The House Appropriations Committee today approved the fiscal year 2014 defense spending bill on a voice vote.

Here's the committee statement:

The legislation includes funding for critical national security needs, and provides the resources needed to continue the nation’s military efforts abroad. In addition, the bill provides essential funding for health and quality of life programs for the men and women of the Armed Forces and their families.

In total, the bill provides $512.5 billion in non-war funding, a decrease of $5.1 billion below the fiscal year 2013 enacted level and $3.4 billion below the President's request. This is approximately $28.1 billion above the current level caused by automatic sequestration spending cuts. The bill also includes $85.8 billion in war funding for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).

"This bill makes the hard choices to keep our nation safe, secure, and constantly prepared for whatever threats we may face. It provides funding to advance our missions abroad, to prepare and equip our troops, and to ensure the effectiveness of the world's greatest military," House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers said, "And, given our current budget challenges, it reflects common-sense decisions that save taxpayer dollars wherever possible -- without affecting the safety or success of our troops and missions."

"This bill provides the Department with the much needed resources required to modernize and maintain readiness at the levels needed for our military to preserve its standing as the most capable and superior armed forces in the world. I applaud the Committee for approving it today, and urge its quick passage on the House floor," Defense Subcommittee Chairman C.W. Bill Young said.

The following amendments to the fiscal year 2014 Defense Appropriations bill were approved today by the full committee:

Rep. Young -– The manager's amendment makes technical and non-controversial changes to the bill and report. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

DeLauro -- The amendment prohibits funding for equipment purchases from the Rosoboronexport company, unless certain conditions are met, such as a prohibition on Rosoboronexport contracts with Syria, and a requirement that contracts be competitively bid. The amendment was adopted on a voice vote.

Moran -- The amendment requires a portion of the funding for the Afghan National Security Forces be used for the recruitment and retention of women. The amendment was adopted on a 24-22 vote.

To view the committee report accompanying the bill, click here.

The Defense Department is reaching out to the private sector and to any "experts and interested parties" in its pursuit of detecting counterfeit parts in the military supply chain.

In a Federal Register notice published today, DOD states it wants to open a dialogue "about the requirements for detection and avoidance of counterfeit electronic parts in DOD contracts." The department published a proposed rule to the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation System on May 16.

A public hearing will be held on June 18 to obtain the views of industry and experts in the field, DOD said. The hearing will be held at the General Services Administration office in Washington.

The proposed rule is a partial implementation of a section of the Fiscal Year 2012 Defense Authorization Act, according to DOD:

It addresses the responsibility of DOD contractors for detecting and avoiding the use or inclusion of counterfeit electronic parts or suspect counterfeit electronic parts in items delivered to the Department. In lieu of requiring contractors to establish an entirely new and separate system for avoiding the purchase, and detecting the receipt, of counterfeit or suspect counterfeit parts, DoD plans to use contractors' existing purchasing systems and quality assurance systems.

The DFARS case will also put into practice a section of the 2012 authorization law that outlines contractor responsibility. "This provision of the law makes the costs associated with counterfeit or suspect counterfeit parts unallowable except in certain limited circumstances," DOD said.