The Insider

Army Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander is finally getting his shot at explaining to Congress his vision for U.S. Cyber Command, and senators will get a chance to inquire about the particulars of the newest military command's raison d'être. Alexander's nomination hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee is scheduled for April 15, the panel announced yesterday. He will testify alongside Vice Adm. James Winnefeld, who is nominated to lead U.S. Northern Command.

President Obama nominated Alexander last October to lead CYBERCOM, the sub-unified command that initially will operate under the auspices of U.S. Strategic Command. The job of CYBERCOM chief comes with a promotion to four-star general, and Alexander would continue to be director of the National Security Agency, if confirmed.

The Obama administration's Nuclear Posture Review, released today, directs the Pentagon to retire the nuclear-tipped version of Tomahawk cruise missile, as expected.

"This system serves a redundant purpose in the U.S. nuclear stockpile," the report states. "It has been one of a number of means to forward-deploy nuclear weapons in time of crisis. Other means include forward-deployment of bombers with either bombs or cruise missiles, as well as forward-deployment of dual-capable fighters. In addition, U.S. ICBMs and SLBMs are capable of striking any potential adversary. The deterrence and assurance roles of TLAM-N can be adequately substituted by these other means, and the United States remains committed to providing a credible extended deterrence posture and capabilities."

Inside the Pentagon reported in February that the nuclear Tomahawk would likely be retired.

The Missile Defense Agency plans to brief potential contractors next week on its nascent space-based, missile-launch-tracking system, envisioned as a follow-on to the experimental, dual-satellite Space Tracking and Surveillance System.

The unclassified industry day on the Precision Tracking Space System will take place on April 9 from 9 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. Eastern time at the National Conference Center in Lansdowne, VA, According to an April 1 Federal Business Opportunities notice.

The agency plans to incorporate lessons learned from the two STSS demonstration satellites currently in orbit to inform its decisions while it develops the PTSS capability, according to MDA's fiscal year 2011 budget documents. Consequently, MDA is asking Congress for $67 million in FY-11 to fund the PTSS effort, InsideDefense.com reported in February.

The agency's objective for the PTSS program "is to deliver an operational space-based system to address the ascent phase midcourse tracking challenge facing the MDA," the notice states, adding:

To meet this objective, MDA plans to first develop a prototype system, followed by an operational PTSS. The PTSS prototype and operational system are planned to consist of a constellation of spacecraft and associated ground control and processing equipment that is integrated with the developed Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) elements to support command and control, track generation, fusion, and transfer of data through the entire fire-control loop. The operational PTSS will integrate into the BMDS.

As for the industry day itself, MDA has four goals, according to the notice:

(1) to familiarize participants with MDA’s efforts in the Precision Tracking Space System,
(2) share the acquisition approach for the prototype and operational PTSS,
(3) discuss the planned timing and content of solicitations related to PTSS, and
(4) answer questions.

A new Senate Republican Policy Committee paper is taking the Obama administration to task for not doing enough to compel Iran to give up its nuclear program.

"The United Nations Security Council has been demanding for years that Iran cease its uranium enrichment program," the paper notes. "Barack Obama made clear when he was a candidate for President that diplomacy without precondition was his preferred policy to address Iran’s nuclear program. As President he implemented that policy, saying he would give it until the end of 2009 to see 'serious movement on the part of the Iranians.' Secretary of State Clinton agreed that 'crippling sanctions' should be the consequence if diplomatic offers to Iran 'are either rejected or the process is inconclusive or unsuccessful.'"

Has that process been successful? Republicans sure don't think so, according to the report:

There is little more to show for the year of engagement than an additional year’s worth of enriched uranium and functioning centrifuges. A publicly revealed covert uranium enrichment facility is just the most recent evidence Iran has no intention of halting its nuclear program.

Tough sanctions are intended to prevent Iran from continuing its nuclear program in defiance of international demands. If the U.S. does not impose them after insisting it would, both allies and enemies will question our credibility.

June promises to be a decisive month for the military space community. For one, Pentagon leaders plan to release the final version of their space posture review during that month. In addition, officials plan to wrap up an initial capabilities document for the National Space Situational Awareness program, according to a recent Air Force note on the Federal Business Opportunities Web site.

Such documents are created as part of the Defense Department's Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System. In the case of the National SSA program, any information coming out of the effort will likely highly classified, given that military space activities are closely guarded secrets in the face of competition from countries like China and Russia.

Reliable situational awareness of all objects and goings-on in space is considered a prerequisite for any offensive and protective military space capability, Pentagon officials have said. Work on the National SSA ICD is co-led by the Air Force Space Command and the National Security Space Office, according to the March 16 FedBizOpps notice.

Pentagon acquisition chief Ashton Carter said today the department has not yet decided whether to extend the May 10 deadline for industry responses to the Air Force's KC-X tanker request for proposals.

Carter made the comment in response to a reporter's question at a National Aeronautics Association luncheon.

EADS, which is weighing whether to compete against Boeing for the lucrative contract, would like the Defense Department to significantly extend the deadline. Last week, Defense Secretary Robert Gates told Senate appropriators that DOD had received a letter from EADS formally requesting an extension, but Gates said DOD had not yet decided what to do.

The State Department's top legal adviser this week gave a speech at the American Society of International Law's (ASIL) 104th annual meeting that touched on, among other topics, the lawful use of unmanned aerial vehicles in warfare. According to an ASIL statement, Koh's speech "included a specific affirmation of the administration’s approach to the use of force, including the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which has recently come into question by some legal experts."

Specifically, Koh said:

(It) is the considered view of this administration . . . that targeting practices, including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), comply with all applicable law, including the laws of war. . . . As recent events have shown, Al Qaeda has not abandoned its intent to attack the United States, and indeed continues to attack us. Thus, in this ongoing armed conflict, the United States has the authority under international law, and the responsibility to its citizens, to use force, including lethal force, to defend itself, including by targeting persons such as high-level al Qaeda leaders who are planning attacks. . . . (T)his administration has carefully reviewed the rules governing targeting operations to ensure that these operations are conducted consistently with law of war principles, including:

- First, the principle of distinction, which requires that attacks be limited to military objectives and that civilians or civilian objects shall not be the object of the attack; and

- Second, the principle of proportionality, which prohibits attacks that may be expected to cause incidental loss of civilian life, injury to civilians, damage to civilian objects, or a combination thereof, that would be excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

In U.S. operations against al Qaeda and its associated forces – including lethal operations conducted with the use of unmanned aerial vehicles – great care is taken to adhere to these principles in both planning and execution, to ensure that only legitimate objectives are targeted and that collateral damage is kept to a minimum.

In response to arguments by opponents of using UAVs in warfare, Koh defended the Obama administration's policy:

(S)ome have suggested that the very use of targeting a particular leader of an enemy force in an armed conflict must violate the laws of war. But individuals who are part of such an armed group are belligerent and, therefore, lawful targets under international law. . . . (S)ome have challenged the very use of advanced weapons systems, such as unmanned aerial vehicles, for lethal operations. But the rules that govern targeting do not turn on the type of weapon system involved, and there is no prohibition under the laws of war on the use of technologically advanced weapons systems in armed conflict – such as pilotless aircraft or so-called smart bombs -- so long as they are employed in conformity with applicable laws of war. . . . (S)ome have argued that the use of lethal force against specific individuals fails to provide adequate process and thus constitutes unlawful extrajudicial killing. But a state that is engaged in armed conflict or in legitimate self-defense is not required to provide targets with legal process before the state may use lethal force. Our procedures and practices for identifying lawful targets are extremely robust, and advanced technologies have helped to make our targeting even more precise. In my experience, the principles of distinction and proportionality that the United States applies are not just recited at meeting. They are implemented rigorously throughout the planning and execution of lethal operations to ensure that such operations are conducted in accordance with all applicable law. . . . Fourth and finally, some have argued that our targeting practices violate domestic law, in particular, the long-standing domestic ban on assassinations. But under domestic law, the use of lawful weapons systems -- consistent with the applicable laws of wear -- for precision targeting of specific high-level belligerent leaders when acting in self-defense or during an armed conflict is not unlawful, and hence does not constitute ‘assassination.’