The Insider

War Powers
By John Liang
February 28, 2013 at 4:14 PM

A new Congressional Research Service report predicts that "there may be a renewed focus" in the new Congress on how far Congress can go to legislate limits on the president's ability to conduct military operations in places like Afghanistan, Yemen or Somalia, among others.

The Feb. 19 report -- originally obtained by Secrecy News -- notes that "controversy continues over the appropriate role that Congress should play in regulating U.S. military operations against foreign entities. U.S. action against Libya reignited consideration of long-standing questions concerning the President’s constitutional authority to use military force without congressional authorization, as well as congressional authority to regulate or limit the use of such force."

CRS states:

This report begins by discussing constitutional provisions allocating war powers between Congress and the President, and presenting a historical overview of relevant court cases. It considers Congress's constitutional authority to end a military conflict via legislative action; the implications that the War Powers Resolution or the repeal of prior military authorization may have upon the continued use of military force; and other considerations which may inform congressional decisions to limit the use of military force via statutory command or through funding limitations. The report discusses Congress’s ability to limit funding for U.S. participation in hostilities, examining relevant court cases and prior measures taken by Congress to restrict military operations, as well as possible alternative avenues to fund these activities in the event that appropriations are cut. The report then provides historical examples of measures that restrict the use of particular personnel, and concludes with a brief analysis of arguments that might be brought to bear on the question of Congress's authority to limit the availability of troops to serve in ongoing military operations. Although not beyond debate, such limitations appear to be within Congress's authority to allocate resources for military operations.

View the full report.

View InsideDefense.com's extensive trove of defense-related CRS reports.

Reporting For Duty
By Christopher J. Castelli
February 27, 2013 at 1:35 PM

On his first day on the job, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel will meet privately with senior defense officials and speak publicly with service members and civilian employees at the Pentagon.

Hagel was scheduled to arrive at the building at 7:30 a.m; at 8:15 a.m., Hagel was slated to take the oath of office in a private ceremony attended by family members and his immediate office staff. "Secretary Hagel will then host the daily senior staff update meeting attended by civilian and military leaders of the department," according to a statement released by the Pentagon.

And at 10:30 a.m., Hagel is scheduled to make remarks in the Pentagon's auditorium, which will be open to the media and webcast live by the department. In the afternoon, Hagel is due to meet with the service secretaries and attend meetings at the White House.

"I will be counting on Chuck’s judgment and counsel as we end the war in Afghanistan, bring our troops home, stay ready to meet the threats of our time and keep our military the finest fighting force in the world," President Obama said in a statement last night after the Senate narrowly confirmed Hagel by a vote of 58-41.

Hagel Confirmed
By John Liang
February 26, 2013 at 10:01 PM

With three days to go before sequestration kicks in, the full Senate just confirmed former Sen. Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) nomination to succeed Leon Panetta as the next Defense Secretary. The Senate Armed Services Committee had approved Hagel's nomination on Feb. 12.

While as of this writing voting was still ongoing, Hagel had already garnered enough votes to secure his post. (UPDATE: The final vote tally was 58-41.)

COCOMs Hearing
By John Liang
February 26, 2013 at 9:27 PM

The Senate Armed Services Committee plans to hold a hearing featuring the heads of U.S. Central and Special Operations commands next week.

Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis, the current head of CENTCOM, will testify alongside Navy Adm. and SOCOM chief William McRaven at 9:30 a.m. on March 5, according to a committee statement issued this afternoon.

Meanwhile, the committee earlier today approved the nominations of Army Gen. Lloyd Austin to become the next CENTCOM chief and Army Gen. David Rodriguez to become head of U.S. Africa Command, according to a separate panel statement.

No date has yet been set for the full Senate to consider the Austin and Rodriguez appointments, whose nomination hearing took place earlier this month.

Sequester Questioner
By Maggie Ybarra
February 26, 2013 at 4:29 PM

In the days leading up to an important House Appropriations defense subcommittee hearing, Air Force Headquarters has released a "frequently asked questions" document providing guidance for its civilian employees on potential administrative furloughs.

The document, obtained by Inside the Air Force, shows that even mission-critical employees will be furloughed as the service prepares to shoulder budget cuts likely to be implemented in March. Those budget cuts are tied to both sequestration and the prospect of a yearlong continuing resolution.

But the impact of those budget cuts may not be as detrimental as some portray them to be, according to a source in the Pentagon. Sequestration is not a fiscal cliff that the Air Force will be pushed off of, this source argued, but more akin to a “slightly graded hill” that a truck driver must navigate on a highway.

“Like with any grade, the semi-truck will be fine as long as it's not a lengthy indefinite-graded road. Then the brakes go out. Then you have problems,” the source said.

The source told suggested that the Air Force will not immediately be impacted if sequestration is implemented on March 1, “so it does not matter if Congress does nothing.”

“The problem will be if it continues past [fiscal year 2013] into FY-14, etc.,” the source said.

DOD Sequestration Bill
By John Liang
February 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM

With the sequestration deadline looming at the end of this week, House Armed Services seapower and projection forces subcommittee Chairman Randy Forbes (R-VA) announced this morning that he has introduced a bill that would remove the Defense Department-related budget cuts from sequestration and reduce the total size of the sequester by that amount. According to a statement his office just issued:

"Sequestration cuts eclipse any other national security threat facing our nation," said Forbes. "Lawmakers in Washington have crossed a red line in our constitutional duty -- outlined in the first sentence of the U.S. Constitution -- to provide for the common defense.  I voted against sequestration and I’ve warned about these cuts for 18 months.  This bill represents an opportunity for lawmakers to blunt sequestration's debilitating impact on national defense."

With just days before the sequester takes place, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey has testified that the U.S. military "can’t give another dollar" in defense cuts.  Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has said sequestration "guarantees that we hollow out the military."

Since 2009, the Department of Defense has taken roughly $800 billion in spending reductions.  Sequestration would cut nearly $500 billion more in defense spending. National defense accounts for approximately 20% of federal spending, yet will constitute roughly 50% of the total spending cuts under sequestration.  These cuts would represent the most dramatic cuts facing the Department of Defense in three and a half decades -- far surpassing the cuts of the 1990s which left our nation unprepared for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

"While I believe that the whole of sequestration's arbitrary cuts can and should be avoided, America's lawmakers must take direct and immediate action to ensure that the U.S. military has the capabilities necessary to protect and defend the United States," Forbes said. "The security of our nation and our men and women in uniform must not continue to bear the brunt of the two-plus-year failure of Congress and the President to agree on the appropriate way to reduce the federal debt and deficit."

LCS Council
By John Liang
February 25, 2013 at 3:55 PM

Today's issue of Inside the Navy quotes the Littoral Combat Ship Council chairman as saying that the program should be "at the leading edge of weapons and sensor technology development" and the go-to ship class for industry to bring their good ideas for at-sea testing:

Vice Adm. Richard Hunt, director of Navy staff, said during a Feb. 21 media teleconference that his line about staying at the leading edge of technology was included in a Jan. 31 memo to the chief of naval operations and was meant to serve as a reminder that LCS should be a part of any discussion about future capabilities.

"There's a variety of capabilities out there that I think are suitable to bring to this class of ship," Hunt said, mentioning directed energy weapons such as laser guns, the railgun and a high-powered microwave as items that could be incorporated into LCS mission packages in the next 10 to 15 years. "And the modularity and the margin that we have in the ship right now I think fits very, very nicely to doing that sometime down the road."

Hunt said he was not seeking LCS-specific research and development funding, but rather he said he wanted the ship class to be a test bed for good ideas from the R&D community.

"This is the perfect platform for you to bring your ideas, and because of the modularity, as soon as we get numbers out there I think you will find that we can put new systems on, we can test them, see what works, what doesn't, what modifications may have to be done," he said. Arleigh Burke-class destroyers tend to take on this role now because there are more of them than any other class of surface combatants, but Hunt argued that LCS would have the benefits of a modular and reconfigurable design on top of simply being present in high numbers.

View the full story, which includes quotes from LCS Program Executive Officer Rear Adm. James Murdoch and Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert, .

Also, check out this related document:

LCS Council Memo To CNO

The Jan. 31, 2013, memo outlines the Littoral Combat Ship Council's recent oversight actions.

View InsideDefense.com's full coverage of naval ship issues.

Budget Cutting
By Christopher J. Castelli
February 22, 2013 at 9:56 PM

Former Pentagon policy chief Michèle Flournoy today defended the department's decision to omit from the 2012 Defense Strategic Guidance any discussion of greater risks it might accept in various potential budget-cutting scenarios.

Officials decided against including options for scaling back the strategy because Congress could have seized the opportunity to pocket savings, she said during a panel discussion at the Brookings Institution.

"I think there was a sense that the task at hand was to take the 10-year budget guidance that was in the Budget Control Act of 2011 and rethink our strategy in that context," Flournoy said.

"I think that there was an assumption that this was going to be an iterative process – that if the goal posts keep moving in terms of the resource constraints, we're going to have to keep learning and refining on that strategic guidance," she added. "So I think it was seen as a first bite at the apple." Given the iterative nature of the process, it was natural for Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey to immediately launch his "visioning exercise to think about the force of 2020" after the guidance was released, Flournoy said.

"But we don't want to have to accept risk or manage risk in areas that we really would rather not until we have clarity on the resource picture," she said. "And we still don't have clarity on the resource picture because here we are facing sequestration in the complete absence of any kind of consensus about the parameters of a budget deal."

But Kori Schake of the Hoover Institution and former Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, who co-authored a paper on national defense issued today, criticized DOD's approach during the panel discussion.

Schake said she and Roughead strongly believe it would have been better to include excursions in the Defense Strategic Guidance showing where greater risk might be taken in the event of more budget cuts. DOD's decision not to do that has dramatically complicated the current challenge of balancing risk in the force, she said.

Flournoy countered that the strategy was aligned with the Budget Control Act's resource picture. The problem with including excursions, she said, was that it would have enabled Congress to "pocket" savings where the department was presumably willing to take risk without pledging to provide DOD resources.

Roughead said rather than being "pick-pocketed," DOD is about to lose the "whole enchilada" through sequestration. The American people have not had the benefit of a discussion about the risks and tradeoffs involved, he said.

Itemized Reductions
By Maggie Ybarra
February 22, 2013 at 6:16 PM

The Air Force has compiled a list of how many civilians will have to be furloughed at each base to accommodate pending budget cuts, as well as how much the service will save per base.

The list, obtained by Inside the Air Force, shows that Robins Air Force Base, GA, will suffer the most civilian furloughs. The Air Force projects that it can save more than $110 million simply by placing 14,205 Robins AFB civilian workers on furlough, the document shows. Tinker Air Force Base, OK, would see 14,206 civilian furloughs, saving the Air Force more than $109 million. Also among the top three bases to feel the brunt impact of the furloughs is Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, which will see 12,595 civilians furloughed, providing the service with a savings of about $98 million.

Pentagon civilian employees also factor into those savings. To free up $16 million, the Air Force will have to furlough 2,052 civilian employees employed at the Pentagon. The service also plans to furlough 202 civilians working at the Russell-Knox Building in Quantico.

The Air Force is facing major budget cuts in March, which is why the service has prepared, in advance of those budget cuts, a base-by-base plan for the furloughs. On March 1, sequestration -- a $500 billion across-the-board budget cut that would impact the entire Defense Department, eating away at its financial plans for the next 10 years -- could be implemented if Congress cannot agree on an alternative budget plan that would spare DOD from the bulk of the budget cuts. In addition, the service faces the possibility of coping with a yearlong continuing resolution that, if implemented, would begin on March 27. The two budget cuts combined have made it difficult for the Air Force to prepare for future budgets and also forced the service to prepare for a worst-case scenario.

The Air Force has already has taken actions to alleviate some of the fiscal pressures that the combined budget cuts pose, such as instituting a hiring freeze and scaling back on some of its military construction projects.

Flying Hour Reduction
By Courtney Albon
February 22, 2013 at 5:02 PM

The chief of the Air Force's air component headquarters for strategic deterrence said today that as the Eighth Air Force works to implement a 10 percent reduction in flying hours, officials there are realizing that there's no easy way to mitigate a loss of flying time.

Maj. Gen Stephen Wilson, commander of the Eighth Air Force, spoke this morning at the Annual Nuclear Deterrence Summit and, in an interview with Inside the Air Force following the speech, said the effect of a cut in flying hours is fairly simple. "The less you fly, the less experience you get, the less proficient you are," Wilson said. "And in our game, we've said we need to be bringing our A-game every day.”

Earlier this month, Air Force Global Strike Command announced plans to trim flying hours for its B-52 fleet by 10 percent in preparation for the across-the-board sequestration cuts that could be triggered next week. The worst of the sequestration-related cuts will likely pass over the nuclear enterprise, but the targeted flying-hour reduction will allow the command to get ahead of the curve.

Wilson said command leadership is working with Air Force leadership to determine how best to apply the reductions and what impact they may have on flying and fleet readiness. The duration of sorties will be shorter, he said, but the number of sorties flown will likely not change.

"We're going through the numbers now," he said. "So we've already started a 10 percent reduction in flying hours and keeping the nuclear enterprise, the people who do the nuclear mission, as a priority. But if we have to start reducing the number of sorties we fly, the hours we fly are crucial. Again, it's one of those long-term things that says OK, if the average crew member needs to fly about 20 hours per month and now they're not going to get to fly the sorties, and then we get into a tiered-readiness type thing. We're trying every way we can to avoid that across the nuclear fleet."

The impact of fewer flying hours is felt in other areas as well. "Planes like to be flown," Wilson said, and aircraft idleness can lead to a greater need for maintenance over time.

The larger effects that sequestration may have on the Eighth Air Force are still unclear, but Wilson said he's concerned about the cuts' hindering the service's recruitment efforts. In recent years, the organization has struggled to build experience in certain career fields, particularly in the area of maintainers. Through ramped-up training and recruitment efforts the experience gap has improved and the mission-capable rate has increased, but sequestration could deliver a blow to those efforts.

"If I can't make instructor pilots, we can't train students and the students come to our airplanes to fly, to keep the pipeline open," Wilson said. "People don't realize the second- and third-tier effects of sequestration."

Important People
By Lee Hudson
February 21, 2013 at 5:30 PM

Following a Pentagon announcement that all civilian workers would be furloughed if sequestration budget cuts go into effect March 1, the Navy's top officer released a memorandum yesterday stating that civilians are essential to the service's mission. There are 186,000 civilians who serve in all 50 states and 20 countries overseas, Chief of Naval Operations Jonathan Greenert, wrote.

Navy civilians repair and maintain ships, aircraft and combat systems, plan and manage budgets, and design and engineer the future force, he wrote.

"As we prepare for potential budget shortfalls, I remain focused on supporting our Sailors, Civilians and their Families and funding our most important missions," Greenert noted. "If sequestration begins 1 March, furloughs would begin in late April."

Civilians will continue to play a critical part in the United States' war and peace efforts, even in the face of budget uncertainty and fiscal challenges, he added.

Opposing Hagel
By John Liang
February 21, 2013 at 4:16 PM

Fifteen senators signed a letter sent to the president today calling for the withdrawal of former Sen. Chuck Hagel's (R-NE) nomination to be the next defense secretary.

"While we respect Senator Hagel's honorable military service, in the interest of national security, we respectfully request that you withdraw his nomination," the letter states. "It would be unprecedented for a secretary of defense to take office without the broad base of bipartisan support and confidence needed to serve effectively in this critical position.

"Senator Hagel's performance at his confirmation hearing was deeply concerning, leading to serious doubts about his basic competence to meet the substantial demands of the office," the letter continues. "While Senator Hagel's erratic record and myriad conversions on key national security issues are troubling enough, his statements regarding Iran were disconcerting."

Sens. John Cornyn (R-TX), James Inhofe (R-OK), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), Roger Wicker (R-MS), David Vitter (R-LA), Ted Cruz (R-TX), Mike Lee (R-UT), Patrick Toomey (R-PA), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Dan Coats (R-IN), Ron Johnson (R - WI), James Risch (R-ID), John Barrasso (R-WY), Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Tim Scott (R-SC) signed the letter.

View the letter.

Punching Out
By Megan Eckstein
February 20, 2013 at 4:24 PM

Navy Under Secretary Robert Work is stepping down as the sea service's second-ranking civilian leader and will take over as chief executive officer of the Center for a New American Security, the Washington think tank announced this morning.

Work will move to CNAS on April 22 after having served as under secretary since May 2009.

"Bob Work is in the very front ranks of those thinking about and working to strengthen our national security," said CNAS Chairman of the Board of Directors and former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig. "More than a thought leader, he is also a widely admired leader in all dimensions. His qualities of character combine with qualities of mind to make him a worthy successor to Nate Fick and CNAS co-founders Kurt Campbell and Michèle Flournoy as the new head of CNAS. We are delighted to have him."

Work graduated from the Naval Reserve Officers Training Course at the University of Illinois, and was commissioned a second lieutenant in the U.S. Marine Corps in August 1974. He spent 27 years in the Marine Corps and upon retirement stayed involved in military affairs through his work at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments. He led the Navy issues team for President Obama's Defense Department Transition Team after the 2008 elections and then was appointed to the role of Navy under secretary.

"Since its inception in 2007, CNAS has established a reputation for innovative, pragmatic and bi-partisan thinking about national security affairs," Work said in a CNAS statement. "I am both honored and excited at the prospect of leading such a great organization, and working with superb people like Richard Danzig, Michèle Flournoy, Richard Armitage, Richard Fontaine and Shawn Brimley to take CNAS to the next level."

Pending Nominations
By John Liang
February 20, 2013 at 4:00 PM

The Senate Armed Services Committee will hold a hearing next week to consider the nomination of Alan Estevez to become Pentagon acquisition chief Frank Kendall's deputy.

Estevez is the assistant secretary of defense for logistics and materiel readiness, according to his official biography.

Additionally, the committee will consider the nomination of Frederick Vollrath to be assistant secretary of defense for readiness and force management. According to his bio, Vollrath is a retired Army lieutenant general and a former deputy chief of staff for personnel (G-1).

The committee will also discuss the nomination of Eric Fanning to become Air Force under secretary. Fanning has been deputy Navy under secretary since 2009, according to his bio.

The hearing will take place at 9:30 a.m. on Thursday, Feb. 28, according to the committee statement.

Panetta's Message
By Christopher J. Castelli
February 20, 2013 at 3:32 PM

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta today released a message about the Pentagon's preparations for potential sequestration on March 1, as well as for furlough notifications. "In the event of sequestration we will do everything we can to be able to continue to perform our core mission of providing for the security of the United States, but there is no mistaking that the rigid nature of the cuts forced upon this department, and their scale, will result in a serious erosion of readiness across the force," the message states.

Today, Panetta formally notified Congress that furloughs could occur under sequestration. Senior defense officials are expected to discuss furloughs at a press briefing this afternoon.

Panetta's full message:

For more than a year and a half, the president, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and I have repeatedly voiced our deep concerns over the half a trillion dollars in automatic across-the-board cuts that would be imposed under sequestration and the severe damage that would do both to this department and to our national defense.

The administration continues to work with Congress to reach agreement on a balanced deficit reduction plan to avoid these cuts. Meanwhile, because another trigger for sequestration is approaching on March 1, the department's leadership has begun extensive planning on how to implement the required spending reductions. Those cuts will be magnified because the department has been forced to operate under a six-month continuing resolution that has already compelled us to take steps to reduce spending.

In the event of sequestration we will do everything we can to be able to continue to perform our core mission of providing for the security of the United States, but there is no mistaking that the rigid nature of the cuts forced upon this department, and their scale, will result in a serious erosion of readiness across the force.

I have also been deeply concerned about the potential direct impact of sequestration on you and your families. We are doing everything possible to limit the worst effects on DoD personnel - but I regret that our flexibility within the law is extremely limited. The president has used his legal authority to exempt military personnel funding from sequestration, but we have no legal authority to exempt civilian personnel funding from reductions. As a result, should sequestration occur and continue for a substantial period, DoD will be forced to place the vast majority of its civilian workforce on administrative furlough.

Today, I notified Congress that furloughs could occur under sequestration. I can assure you that, if we have to implement furloughs, all affected employees will be provided at least 30 days' notice prior to executing a furlough and your benefits will be protected to the maximum extent possible. We also will work to ensure that furloughs are executed in a consistent and appropriate manner, and we will also continue to engage in discussions with employee unions as appropriate.

Working with your component heads and supervisors, the department's leaders will continue to keep you informed. As we deal with these difficult issues, I want to thank you for your patience, your hard work, and your continued dedication to our mission of protecting the country.

Our most important asset at the department is our world-class personnel. You are fighting every day to keep our country strong and secure, and rest assured that the leaders of this department will continue to fight with you and for you.