National Security – DIME
President-elect Barack Obama has appointed an extraordinary team for national security policy.
…Process is no substitute for substance, of course. But even with this caveat, the new national security team encourages the hope that America is moving beyond its divisions to its opportunities.
The writer was national security adviser to President Richard M. Nixon and secretary of state under Presidents Nixon and Gerald R. Ford.
Note that Secretary of Defense Gates is referencing “Defense” strategy – a balanced concept is also needed for the National Security Strategy that would more effectively integrate the “whole-of-government” approach.
ESSAY: A Balanced Strategy, Reprogramming the Pentagon for a New Age, Robert M. Gates From Foreign Affairs, January/February 2009
The defining principle of the Pentagon’s new National Defense Strategy is balance. The United States cannot expect to eliminate national security risks through higher defense budgets, to do everything and buy everything. The Department of Defense must set priorities and consider inescapable tradeoffs and opportunity costs.
The strategy strives for balance in three areas:
— between trying to prevail in current conflicts and preparing for other contingencies,
— between institutionalizing capabilities such as counterinsurgency and foreign military assistance and maintaining the United States’ existing conventional and strategic technological edge against other military forces, and
— between retaining those cultural traits that have made the U.S. armed forces successful and shedding those that hamper their ability to do what needs to
What is dubbed the war on terror is, in grim reality, a prolonged, worldwide irregular campaign — a struggle between the forces of violent extremism and those of moderation.
U.S. Joint Forces Command releases Joint Operating Environment 2008 – a strategic framework that forecasts possible threats and opportunities that will challenge the future joint force.
Exercise Yama Sakura, Camp Asaka, Japan — What is it?
Yama Sakura is the most important bilateral exercise the U.S. Army conducts with our closest ally in the Pacific; Japan. Yama Sakura (meaning Mountain Cherry Blossom in Japanese) is a weeklong command post exercise scheduled this year from Dec. 7 to 13 at Camp Asaka, Japan.
What has the Army done?In the past, I Corps played the pivotal partner and training role, but this year U.S. Army, Pacific (USARPAC) will test and train the transformed Theater Army command and control structure, including the main command post (MCP), operational command post (OCP), and early entry command post (EECP); as well as four of our theater enabling commands. Both the EECP and OCP will provide the U.S. Pacific command (USPACOM) commander additional flexible command and control throughout the region when their transformation is complete in the coming years. During Yama Sakura, USARPAC will also be further strengthening our ties to the Japanese Self-Defense Force (JSDF) and serving as full partners for the JSDF’s ongoing efforts to integrate their service components into joint operations.
What continued efforts does the Army have planned for the future?USARPAC is heavily engaged in support of USPACOM’s Theater Security Cooperation Program and Phase 0 Operations. We build capacity, capability, enhance interoperability and strengthen the bonds of friendship with our neighbors and allies through numerous exercises and exchanges with 36 countries in the Pacific region. These engagements reassure friends and allies of America’s long-term commitment to peace and stability in the Pacific region. This year, USARPAC forces will participate in approximately 75 events which include joint, bilateral and multilateral exercises in China, India, Taiwan, Japan, Australia, Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mongolia, Singapore, Bangladesh, hilippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, South Korea, and Cambodia. Yama Sakura is just one of the five bilateral exercises in which USARPAC and Japan participate. Next year, USARPAC will be major participants in exercises with Japan including Keen Edge, Northwind, Orient Shield, and Rising Warrior. Additionally, the 2009 Pacific Armies Management Seminar will be held in Tokyo.
Why is this important to the Army?This exercise is a shining example of the continued commitment by the United States and Japan to work as dedicated partners in support of the U.S.-Japan Security Alliance, and for continued peace and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.
USARPAC Web site: http://www.army.mil/institution/organization/unitsandcommands/commandstructure/usarpac/>
Interesting bit: Average US recession (11 since 1930s) lasts less than a year (or 6-12 months) except for two (early 1970s and early 1980s) that were global ones, in addition. Global ones run 12-18 months.
Now we are told (rather retroactively, I might add) that the advanced Old Core world has really been in recession for close to a year, so the thinking becomes we’re about halfway through this.
That corresponds to a lot of predictions I’ve seen that say the recovery doesn’t begin until the second half of 2009.
For the past two years at U.S. Southern Command our approach to security cooperation with the 45 nations and territories of Latin America and the Caribbean has been simple — “real and vibrant partnership for the Americas.”
So, is there a real and vibrant partnership for the Americas? As we learn together from each training exercise and every cooperative opportunity, this partnership will only get stronger, more capable and more diverse. Are there disagreements and controversies? Of course. But together, all the nations of this region can continue to forge a true ”Partnership for the Americas” in the years ahead.
Admiral James Stavridis is commander of the U.S. Southern Command.
Pentagon suppliers
The chairman of a congressional China commission said the panel is concerned that the Pentagon’s reliance on Chinese suppliers has threatened U.S. computers, weapons systems and equipment with sabotage or other remote electronic tampering.
“On defense supply chain, the commissioners remain concerned about the integrity of the defense supply chain, and we are not sure that the defense logistics system managers know what they are getting from China,” said Larry Wortzel, co-chairman of the U.S. China-Economic Security Review Commission. “It is not secure,” he said of the current Pentagon supply chain.
Mr. Wortzel, in an interview, was commenting on one little-noticed finding of the commission in its report made public Nov. 20. The report to Congress warned that widespread Chinese government computer hacking poses risks because of Chinese-supplied parts in U.S. computer networks.
“Components in these computers and networks are manufactured overseas – many of them in China,” the report said. “At least in theory, this equipment is vulnerable to tampering by Chinese security services, such as implanting malicious code that could be remotely activated on command and place U.S. systems or the data they contain at risk of destruction or manipulation.”
In one case, the Pentagon was found to be using hundreds of counterfeit computer routers made in China. “This suggests that at least in part, Defense Department computer systems and networks may be vulnerable to malicious action that could destroy or manipulate information they contain,” the report said.
Mr. Wortzel said the Pentagon logistics agencies in charge of buying the Chinese-made parts gave the commission the “runaround” when panel members asked about the problem.
“Our recommendation is that Congress haul them in and have a classified hearing on this,” Mr. Wortzel said.
Chinese Embassy spokesman Wang Baodong could not be reached for comment. However, Chinese Foreign Ministry official Qin Gang said in a statement Nov. 24 that the commission views China “through tinted lens” and is undermining U.S.-China cooperation by “tarnishing and attacking China deliberately and misleading the general public.”
The Pentagon this week approved a major policy directive that elevates the military’s mission of “irregular warfare” — the increasingly prevalent campaigns to battle insurgents and terrorists, often with foreign partners and sometimes clandestinely — to an equal footing with traditional combat.
The policy, a result of more than a year of debate in the defense establishment, is part of a broader overhaul of the U.S. military’s role as the threat of large-scale combat against other nations’ armies has waned and new dangers have arisen from shadowy non-state actors, such as terrorists that target civilian populations.
“The U.S. has considerable overmatch in traditional capabilities . . . and more and more adversaries have realized it’s better to take us on in an asymmetric fashion,” said Michael G. Vickers, assistant secretary of defense for special operations/low-intensity conflict and interdependent capabilities, and a chief architect of the policy.
The new, 12-page directive states that irregular warfare “is as strategically important as traditional warfare.”
Defined as “a violent struggle among state and non-state actors for legitimacy and influence over the relevant population(s),” irregular warfare “favors indirect and asymmetric approaches . . . to erode an adversary’s power, influence, and will,” the directive states.
A bipartisan panel of foreign policy experts, including some associated with the incoming Obama administration, has recommended changes in the White House national security apparatus that would provide the president and his staff with new tools to ensure interagency cooperation.
“The basic deficiency of the current national security system is that parochial departmental and agency interests, reinforced by Congress, paralyze interagency cooperation even as the variety, speed and complexity of emerging security issues prevents the White House from effectively controlling the system,” says the report of the Project on National Security Reform, released yesterday.
The initial design of the BFSB was outlined in the Operational and Organizational Concept for the Battlefield Surveillance Brigade in 2007. Both active component and reserve component BFSBs have been approved for the Army, and brigades are already participating in Operation Iraqi Freedom.At Fort Knox, KY., the Maneuver Center of Excellence’s Maneuver Battle Lab conducted a Computer Assisted Map Exercise (CAMEX) from Oct. 20 to 24. The experiment, involving participation from both Active and Reserve Component BFSBs, as well as subject matter experts from various proponents, addressed the brigade’s mission and capabilities. Initial insights from the experiment identified a wide variety of actions to be taken, as well as validating the need for further research to improve the Army’s ability to exploit the BFSB’s capabilities.
What continued efforts does the Army have planned for the future?The Chief of Armor will present the initial insights developed during the October BFSB CAMEX at the Reconnaissance Summit held in November 2008 at Fort Knox. This venue is expected to provide refined guidance from a variety of senior leaders (to include the TRADOC Commander) that will drive the way ahead for the BFSB doctrine refinement as well as organizational and material actions. The Maneuver Center of Excellence will continue to develop the BFSB’s concept throughout Fiscal Year 2009 culminating with the initial release of FM 3-55.1, The Battlefield Surveillance Brigade.
Success Through Quality's Weblog 