The Insider

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta today called Japanese Defense Minister Naoki Tanaka to discuss developments related to North Korea's announcement that it plans to conduct a missile launch in mid-April, according to Pentagon Press Secretary George Little.

"Secretary Panetta and Defense Minister Tanaka reiterated their view that such a missile launch would directly violate North Korea's international obligations and U.N. Security Council Resolutions 1718 and 1874," Little said in a statement. "They also affirmed the importance of the U.S.-Japan Alliance in defense of Japan and in contributing to regional peace and security. Both leaders agreed to continue close contact leading up to and following a potential missile launch."

During March 30 remarks aboard the amphibious ship Peleliu (LHA-5), Panetta cited the potential missile launch. "In North Korea they're threatening to fire a missile and they've done this before," he said. "We thought we were in a period of accommodation with them. Now it looks like we're in a period of provocation with the Koreans -- North Koreans. And so you never quite know."

A new Canadian report on the F-35 program criticizes the Canadian defense ministry's handling of the procurement process for the multibillion-dollar endeavor. Issued by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada, the 42-page report says the ministry did not appropriately plan with other Canadian government entities to manage the unique procurement aspects of the program. In a related statement, the auditor general notes that the defense ministry "did not acknowledge that the decision to purchase the F-35 was well under way four years before it was officially announced."

The audit report also states that the defense ministry "likely underestimated the full life-cycle costs of the F-35," adding that parliamentarians were not provided with complete cost information or fully informed about the risks involved. "The budgets for the F-35 acquisition (CAN$9 billion) and sustainment (CAN$16 billion) were initially established in 2008 without the aid of complete cost and other information," the report states. "Some of that information will not be available until years from now. If the budgets prove insufficient to cover total costs, the Department will have to find ways to cover additional costs that may be incurred. Alternatively, it may have to seek additional funds from the government or use funds from other parts of its capital or operating budgets."

The Globe and Mail reports the "scathing report . . . will fuel a political headache for the Harper government, which has ignored years of opposition attacks on the matter and which was fully committed to the F-35 until a few weeks ago."

The Government Accountability Office today released its annual "Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs," which GAO describes as an area on its "high-risk list."

From the summary:

The total estimated cost of the Department of Defense’s (DOD) 2011 portfolio of 96 major defense acquisition programs stands at $1.58 trillion. In the past year, the total acquisition cost of these programs has grown by over $74.4 billion or 5 percent, of which about $31.1 billion can be attributed to factors such as inefficiencies in production, $29.6 billion to quantity changes, and $13.7 billion to research and development cost growth. DOD’s portfolio is dominated by a small number of programs, with the Joint Strike Fighter accounting for the most cost growth in the last year, and the largest projected future funding needs. The majority of the programs in the portfolio have lost buying power in the last year as their program acquisition unit costs have increased. The number of programs in the portfolio has decreased from 98 to 96 in the past year and, looking forward, is projected to decrease again next fiscal year to its lowest level since 2004.

In the past 3 years, GAO has reported that newer programs are demonstrating higher levels of knowledge at key decision points. However, most of the 37 programs GAO assessed this year are still not fully adhering to a knowledge-based acquisition approach. Of the eight programs from this group that passed through one of three key decision points in the acquisition process in the past year, only one—Excalibur Increment Ib—implemented all of the applicable knowledge-based practices. As a result, most of these programs will carry technology, design, and production risks into subsequent phases of the acquisition process that could result in cost growth or schedule delays.

GAO also assessed the implementation of selected acquisition reforms and found that most of the 16 future programs we assessed have implemented key provisions of the Weapon Systems Acquisition Reform Act of 2009. Programs have also started to implement new DOD initiatives, such as developing affordability targets and conducting “should cost” analysis. Finally, as could be expected from the increased activity early in the acquisition cycle, the 16 future programs we assessed are planning to spend more funds in technology development than current major defense acquisition programs.

The Air Force plans to hold a Pentagon briefing tomorrow at noon on the F-22A Raptor's oxygen-generation system, according to a Defense Department announcement issued this afternoon.

The briefers will be retired Air Force Gen. Gregory Martin, chair of the Scientific Advisory Board study on the F-22; Maj. Gen. Noel Jones, director of operational capability requirements and deputy chief of staff for operations, plans and requirements; and Maj. Gen. Charlie Lyon, Air Combat Command's director of operations, the statement reads, adding:

They will provide an update on the secretary of the Air Force-directed study into the systems safety issues involving F-22 oxygen generation systems and discuss F-22 operations since the September 2011 return to fly order.

For more info on the F-22A, check out InsideDefense.com's recent coverage:

New Air Force Program To Execute F-22A Pre-Planned Improvement Package

F-22 Crash Review Marks IG's First In-Depth Mishap Assessment Since 1990s

Air Force Chief Defends F-22A Crash Investigation Report

DOD IG Launches Assessment Of F-22A Crash Report That Blamed Pilot

For the latest military aircraft news, check out InsideDefense.com's Aircraft Alert.

The Defense Department will ask Congress for more funding for Israel's Iron Dome missile defense system, Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said today.

"The Department of Defense has been in conversations with the Government of Israel about U.S. support for the acquisition of additional Iron Dome systems and intends to request an appropriate level of funding from Congress to support such acquisitions based on Israeli requirements and production capacity," Little said this afternoon in a statement.

Supporting the security of the State of Israel is a "top priority" of President Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, Little said, noting the United States has previously provided $205 million in support of Israel’s Iron Dome short-range rocket and mortar defense system.

"During the rocket attacks earlier this month, the Iron Dome system played a critical role in Israel's security," Little said. "When nearly 300 rockets and mortars were fired at southern Israel, Iron Dome intercepted over 80 percent of the targets it engaged, saving many civilian lives."

During a speech this morning, Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) had some nice things to say about the Missile Defense Agency's efforts to fight counterfeit parts in its supply chain:

Last year, our Armed Services Committee investigated counterfeit electronics parts in Defense Department weapon systems.  We found 1,800 cases in the supply chain involving more than 1 million counterfeit parts -- overwhelmingly from China.  The Missile Defense Agency was not immune to the problem.  But under [agency Director] General [Patrick] O'Reilly's leadership, MDA has tackled the issue head-on.  General O'Reilly created some of the strongest protections in the Department of Defense to protect our weapons from counterfeit electronic parts.  Our contractors cooperated with our investigation. They have much at stake in protecting the systems on which our security depends from this flood of counterfeit parts.

The intelligence community this morning released an unclassified study on global water security.

The bottom line, according to the assessment:

During the next 10 years, many countries important to the United States will experience water problems -- shortages, poor water quality, or floods -- that will risk instability and state failure, increase regional tensions, and distract them from working with the United States on important US policy objectives. Between now and 2040, fresh water availability will not keep up with demand absent more effective management of water resources. Water problems will hinder the ability of key countries to produce food and generate energy, posing a risk to global food markets and hobbling economic growth. As a result of demographic and economic development pressures, North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia will face major challenges coping with water problems.

This isn't the first time the intelligence community has worried about the availability of potable water across the globe, however.

Following a March 2 speech Defense Secretary Leon Panetta gave in Louisville, KY, Panetta was asked about climate change and its possible effect on national security. Here's what he said, according to a Pentagon transcript:

With regards to climate change, the -- actually, what we developed at the CIA was an intelligence branch of the CIA that focused on that issue actually for intelligence purposes, because of the implications that these changes might have with regards to national security.

For example, when we incur greater droughts, when we incur areas that in fact have less rain and are incurring unusual climate impacts, it creates obviously an impact in terms of the population.  It's something we have to be aware of because that can create chaos.  We've seen that happen in Africa.  We've seen that happen in other parts of the world.  So we need to have that kind of intelligence.

In addition, because of the ice melt, there are indications of a rising ocean.  We've already seen that take place.  And there our concern is how will that impact on ports, how will that impact on facilities, how will that impact on low line levels that could be impacted by that?  So we continue to try to get intelligence on that as well.

In addition, obviously, we do look at the polar ice cap and are able through imagery to determine what's happening with polar ice cap and just how quickly is it melting and what that impact will be.  I can tell you.  As the polar ice cap melts, the national security implications are that countries like Russia and others are going to be looking for the opportunity to go into those areas and try to go after the resources in the Arctic.  They've already made claims to that effect.

So clearly as it melts, as those opportunities increase, then there are countries that are going to assert themselves, try to gain access to the resources that are there.  That also constitutes an issue that relates to national security.

So from an intelligence point of view, it's important for us to keep track of those trends.  You know, this isn't about the battle of climate change and the issues related to that.  This is about what we are seeing happen and the intelligence that flows from that.  And that is important for us to consider as we look at issues that can threaten America's national security.

. . . And one can go ever further back: In June 2008, InsideDefense.com cited a senior intelligence official as saying that climate change could lead to a range of global crises over the next two decades that would degrade U.S. military readiness by diverting key transportation assets and combat support forces. Further:

Thomas Fingar, deputy director of national intelligence for analysis, told a joint House committee hearing today [June 25, 2008] in testimony that such crises might include humanitarian relief operations and missions to prop up governments of weak states reeling from extreme weather events.

These findings -- distilled from an assessment of the national security implications of global climate change prepared by all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, portions of which InsideDefense.com first reported last week -- could have direct implications for Pentagon planners responsible for the size and shape of U.S. forces as well as the portfolio of weapon systems the Defense Department buys.

"As climate changes spur more humanitarian emergencies, the international community's capacity to respond will be increasingly strained," states Fingar's testimony, prepared for a joint hearing today of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.

"The United States, in particular will be called upon to respond," he said. "The demands of these potential humanitarian responses may significantly tax U.S. military transportation and support force structures, resulting in a strained readiness posture and decreased strategic depth for combat operations."

Another finding with immediate relevance to Pentagon planners concerns possible warming temperatures in Africa, an event that could have particular consequence for the Defense Department as it works to establish a new unified U.S. military command with responsibility for overseeing the American operations there.

"The United States' new military area of responsibility -- Africa Command -- is likely to face extensive and novel operational requirements," Fingar's prepared testimony states. "Sub-Saharan African countries -- if they are hard-hit by climate impacts -- will be more susceptible to worsening disease exposure. Food insecurity, for reasons of both shortages and affordability, will be a growing concern in Africa as well as other parts of the world. Without food aid, the region will likely face higher levels of instability -- particularly violent ethnic clashes over land ownership."

In general, the intelligence community assessment found that climate change may trigger food and water shortages, aggravate health problems and the spread of disease, increase the potential for conflict, property damage -- including critical infrastructure -- and erode coasts.