FCS Funding

Army Touts New Technology (Wall Street Journal)…August Cole, June 13, 2008, Pg. 11

With work on the 2009 defense budget expected to continue through the fall, the Army brought the first FCS prototypes, including a 27-ton hybrid diesel-electric, tanklike cannon and other high-tech systems, to lawmakers’ doorstep this week. The White House requested $3.6 billion for the program in 2009.

The Senate Armed Services Committee said it wants to fully fund FCS in order to give the program a chance to succeed. Cuts, even small ones, can have ripple effects that slow development and hurt suppliers. So far, the cuts add up to about $1 billion, Boeing says.

But the House Armed Services Committee wants to slice about $200 million from the program, just as it sought cuts last year.

The Army is counting on Future Combat Systems to give it new networking and communications abilities, as well as more sophisticated ground vehicles and added firepower.

The program has 14 components, including remotely controlled aerial and ground vehicles. Some technologies are already in use while others, like bigger armored vehicles, won’t be ready for a few years. The first Future Combat Systems-equipped brigade is set for 2015.

Detainees – Day in court

Detainees Now Have Access To Federal Court. (Washington Post)…Josh White and Del Quentin Wilber, June 13, 2008
Pg. 4

Defense attorneys for the 270 detainees at Guantanamo Bay said the Supreme Court decision yesterday that granted detainees habeas corpus rights was a watershed moment that will allow the men, some held for as long as 6 1/2 years, to challenge their detentions before a civilian judge.

Army: FCS Spin Out 1

Future Combat Systems Complete First Major Test
WASHINGTON (Army News Service, June 11, 2008)

Army Evaluation Task Force Soldiers tested FCS Spin Out 1 systems over the course of several weeks within conditions representative of today’s operational environment in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Spin Outs are designed to bring Future Combat Systems capabilities into current force modular brigades in support of Army modernization. Spin Out 1 consists of four different, but inter-operable systems.

It was the first time FCS equipment has been tested in continuous operations under stressful, realistic conditions in the hands of Soldiers.

U.S. Forces: Need for speed

OEF, OIF Demonstrating U.S. Forces Will Need To Be More SOF-Like
(Defense Daily)…Geoff Fein, June 11, 2008 , Pg. 1

After six years in Afghanistan and five in Iraq, top military brass are seeing that U.S. forces will need to be much more SOF (Special Operations Forces)-like, with the ability to move quickly and be more adaptive, says a senior military leader.

The one [requirement] that jumps off the page is the requirement for all services to be SOF-like–to be netted, to be much more flexible, adaptive, faster, lethal, precise– whether it is soft power or hard power, whether it’s projects or kinetics, to bring that into play very very rapidly," Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said at the Defense Writers Group yesterday.

"Everything is flatter and faster, and I believe all of us have to adapt in that way," he added.

Mullen emphasized the importance of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR). He pointed out that the services have significantly increased the pace of fielding ISR capabilities.

Iran: Watch and Wait

At The Tip Of Iran’s Spear, (Washington Post)…David Ignatius, June 8, 2008; Page B07

Let’s try for a moment to put ourselves in the mind of Brig. Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the commander of the Quds Force of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard. For it is the soft-spoken Soleimani, not Iran’s bombastic president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who plays a decisive role in his nation’s confrontation with the United States.

… So imagine that you are Qassem Soleimani, commander of a covert Iranian army deployed across the Middle East: You doubt the Bush administration would run the risk of a military strike against Iran, but you can’t be sure. You think America can’t afford to play chicken in an election year, but you can’t be certain of that, either. So you watch and wait.

… After a particularly heavy day of shelling, Gen. David Petraeus sent Soleimani a message — “Stop shooting at the Green Zone.” The message was conveyed verbally by Iraqi President Jalal Talabani. The Quds Force commander didn’t react immediately. But the heavy mortar fire on the Green Zone soon tapered off. Iran had flexed its muscles and demonstrated America’s vulnerability, and then opted for a tactical retreat.

Lost Leverage: Oil

New Forces Fraying U.S.-Saudi Oil Ties. (Los Angeles Times)…Paul Richter, June 8, 2008, Pg. 1

…The weakening of the economic relationship comes when the vital U.S.-Saudi security relationship also has been fraying.

As gasoline prices have risen, the White House has unsuccessfully exhorted the Saudis to step up production, and Congress has threatened retaliation. But the situation now is a far cry from the days when the U.S. economy dominated the direction of the petroleum market.

“That gave us leverage,” said Greg Priddy, an oil analyst at the Eurasia Group, a New York-based risk assessment firm. “There’s certainly a perception that the power equation has changed.”

China and other Asian nations now use about 17 million barrels a day. That’s up more than 20% since 2003, and booming growth is expected to continue.

By the end of 2007, it was also apparent that the Saudis no longer believed they could substantially affect prices by increasing production.

Now, Saudi oil experts believe that the price run-up is due to such factors as investor speculation, the weak dollar and limited output from such key producers as Iraq, Iran and Venezuela.

In mid-May, President Bush went to Saudi Arabia for the second time this year to seek increased oil production, but officials in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, said no large increases were planned. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) criticized Bush in her presidential campaign appearances, saying she found it embarrassing that a sitting president was “begging” the Saudis.

War-Fighting Doctrine – Irregular

Irregular Warfare, (New York Times Magazine)…William Safire, June 8, 2008

…That’s the ticket: irregular has become the Defense Department’s adjective of choice to modify the current style of warfare.

The definition for irregular warfare — cautiously marked “proposed” when approved in September 2007 by Defense Secretary Robert Gates and other top brass — is “a violent struggle among state and nonstate actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant populations.

Irregular warfare favors indirect and asymmetric approaches, though it may employ the full range of military and other capabilities, in order to erode an adversary’s power, influence and will.”

In defining the war-fighting doctrine now evolving, no matter how broad its range of techniques, it’s useful to grasp the direction of the definition: Irregular warfare is not our nation’s war on enemy irregulars but our inclusion of irregular methods in warring on an unconventional enemy.

Star Wars: Progress

Proving Missile Defense, (Washington Times)…John E. Carey, June 9, 2008 Pg. 25

…Today, Navy ships have shown they can reach targets on the edge of space, almost anywhere within the atmosphere, and down close to the ground. These ships equipped with the Aegis ballistic missile defense system have shown they could destroy a North Korean ballistic missile headed for Japan, the United States or any number of targets in the Pacific region.

The Navy’s Ballistic Missile Defense Program grew from decades of Navy missile defense and guided missile ship development and President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. SDI, once derisively dubbed “star wars” by critics and most of the media, has evolved from a space-based concept into a more realistic sea and land-based “system of systems.”

Today the at sea effort by the U.S. Navy and Japan’s Navy is one of the more demanding and successful elements of the ballistic missile defense effort. Japan’s Navy already deploys this capability aboard its four Kongo class Aegis guided missile destroyers.

National Preparedness: New President

No Time For ‘Nobody Home’ (Washington Post)…Richard Armitage and Michele A. Flournoy, June 9, 2008, Pg. 17

…The “nobody home” phenomenon that occurs between Election Day and the inauguration, as the old administration empties out and the new one has yet to fill its ranks, poses serious risks. It is imperative that this transition proceed quickly and effectively. As Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently noted, “It’s important for us to get as many principals in positions as rapidly as possible in a time of war.”

… But the world does not wait for presidencies to get established. Several American presidents have been tested within their first few months: Kennedy became embroiled in the Bay of Pigs (April 1961); Nixon ordered secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia (March 1969); Clinton inherited a deteriorating situation in Somalia (May 1993); and George W. Bush had to deal with China’s grounding of a U.S. Navy EP-3 aircraft (April 2001).

The next president is even more likely to be tested early. The nation cannot afford to wait six months to have key national security officials in place. We should aim to have them in office within days or, at most, weeks of Jan. 20, 2009.

Air Force Leadership Changes: Variation Principle

Moseley: We Need A Failsafe To Human Error (Air Force Times)…Vago Muradian, June 9, 2008 Pg. 12

A day after Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked for and received his resignation June 5, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. T. Michael Moseley gave this exclusive interview to staff writer Vago Muradian.

… Following the Minot incident, I would say more than 95 percent of my focus has been about getting this right, and we had a commander-directed inquiry. I commissioned Maj. Gen. [Polly] Peyer to conduct a blue ribbon review, which gave us 120 or so specific things to address.

My fundamental tasking to her was, “Is there something bigger here? Is this just an isolated case of a human frailty or are there systemic bigger issues that we have to find and fix?”

Relative to the variation principle, reference to “isolated case” refers to special cause variation. Reference to “systemic” refers to common cause variation. If the problem is due to common causes, a permanent and fundamental change is needed. A special cause refers to a temporary or fleeting event. Required action would be ensuring execution on existing policies and procedures.

A second article, Air Force Shake-Up May Lead To Deeper Overhaul
(Christian Science Monitor)…Gordon Lubold, June 9, 2008, infers a systemic issue. “Extraordinary” refers to special cause variation.

…Gates’s nominee for Air Force secretary will reportedly be Michael Donley, now a top Pentagon aide. He will have to examine the institutional culture that led to the incidents in the first place. A Pentagon investigation directed by Gates in March concluded that there were systemic problems the service had failed to address.

The US Air Force must undertake a wholesale assessment of itself in the wake of the extraordinary firings last week of its top two officials, say analysts.