Slovakia Ready to Provide S-300s and MiG-29s to Ukraine, Pending New Replacements

March 17, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Slovakia has agreed to provide its S-300 air defense systems and MiG-29s to Ukraine “immediately” if it can get “proper” replacements in a timely manner, Slovak defense minister Jaroslav Nad told reporters in a joint press conference with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III on March 17. However, Austin said he had no agreement to announce.

Austin also reiterated U.S. opposition to creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine, and Nad said a number of NATO countries will up their defense spending beyond the target of two percent of their gross domestic product.

“We are willing” to provide what he called the “legacy” systems to Ukraine, Nad said. “We’re willing to do so immediately when we have a proper replacement,” he added. The S-300 is Slovakia’s only strategic air defense system, he said, and if Slovakia turned its gear over to Ukraine, this would “create a security gap in NATO.”

Nad also pointed out that his first duty is to defend Slovakia and its territory, indicating he’s not willing to simply transfer the equipment without a replacement in hand.

“We’re in discussions. There are no public comments to make as of now,” he said, but he indicated that a temporary deployment of some other country’s air defenses might be acceptable while Slovakia waits for whatever it will replace the systems with.

“Should there be a situation that we have a proper replacement, or, we have a capability guarantee for a certain period of time, then we would be willing to discuss the future of the S-300 system,” he said.

Austin, asked to comment, said, “I don’t have any announcements for you this afternoon. These are things that we will continue to work on with all of our allies, and certainly this is not just a U.S. issue—it’s a NATO issue.” He said it’s a topic on which “we will engage a number of allies and partners … in terms of what they’re able to do and what would be required for backfill.” Those discussions are ongoing, he said.

Austin thanked Nad for Slovakia’s willingness to host additional NATO forces. Those forces will be protected by a battery of Patriot air defense systems. Slovakia has just one S-300 battery.

Radovan Javorcik, Slovakia’s Ambassador to the U.S., told Air Force Magazine that his government has agreed to allow the NATO unit to stay on rotations of six months, but these “can extend for one year,” and the Patriots would stay with them during that period.

Nad said the two countries are also discussing “various options for how to fill in this gap” if it also decides “not to use MiG-29s anymore” and to send those aircraft to Ukraine. Slovakia is set to receive 14 new F-16 Block 70 fighters, but the delivery of those jets has been delayed a year, from 2023 to 2024.

Javorcik said the MiG-29s will be phased out in October 2023, regardless of whether the new jets are available.

“Even if Norway were to send” their retiring F-16s right away—one of many puts and takes NATO has discussed to beef up the Eastern flank—Slovakia is still not yet ready to do more than basic maintenance for them, Javorcik said. The F-16 “ecosystem” still has to be developed in Slovakia, he said.

“The new F-16s will not come earlier than … late ‘23, early ’24,” he noted, “So we need to talk to everybody, to all allies,” about how to cover Slovakia’s air defense needs during the interim.

Asked about establishing a No-Fly Zone over Ukraine, Austin reiterated President Biden’s comments that such an arrangement would by definition put NATO into a direct “fight” with Russia, given that ground-launched missile systems and aircraft that launch missiles over Russia would be targets.

“There is no such thing as a no-fly-zone ‘lite,’” he asserted.

“In order to control the skies, you have to shut down the air defenses,” Austin said. “They’re on the ground. And some of those air defense systems are in Russia. And so, again, there’s no easy or simple way to do this. … A no-fly zone means that you’re in a conflict with Russia. So from a U.S. perspective … our position remains that we’re not going to do that.”

Austin said Russia is “using a lot of rockets and missiles and artillery” against Ukraine, and “there are a number of things that can be used to counter that. We’ve seen that the drones have been … very effective. We’ve also seen having the ability to conduct counter-fire with rockets and artillery is also very effective. And so I think increasingly we’ll see the Ukrainian forces turn to those methods to counter that.” A no-fly zone, he said, would not have solved that problem nor the threat from cruise missiles launched from inside Russia.

Nad said that during the NATO ministerial meeting in Belgium, Slovakia agreed to spend more than NATO’s agreed target of two percent of GDP on defense. That “should be just a base” amount, he said, indicating Slovakia’s spending will likely be about as much as Poland and other Baltic NATO countries have committed to, which is about 2.5 percent of GDP.

“I can confirm” that a number of NATO countries have readjusted their planned spending to three percent of GDP, he said.

The “enhanced forward presence troops” that will be deployed to Slovakia “in the upcoming days” will will “provide something that we are lacking here in Slovakia, and they will strengthen our defense and they will strengthen it in a significant way,” Nad said.

He and Austin broadly discussed the “modernization of the Slovak armed forces,” which includes building a new mechanized brigade “and other capabilities.”

Slovakia shares about a 60-mile border with Ukraine, to its east.

Austin said part of the reason for his visit was to demonstrate NATO unity and solidarity with Ukraine. The discussions about the S-300 and MiG-29s indicate that the alliance is “working urgently” to help Ukraine defend itself, he said.

“Our commitment to Article 5 is ironclad,” Austin added, referring to the NATO clause that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. “We sought additional U.S. forces to reinforce our NATO allies. And we have more on call, ready to go if NATO activates its response forces.”

Austin was asked if Russia’s attacks on Ukraine constitute war crimes, and if so, whether that requires a change in U.S. posture.

“Certainly, we’ve all been shocked by the brutality that we continue to witness, day in and day out,” Austin answered. “Purposely” targeting civilians “is a crime,” he said.

“These actions are under review by our State Department,” he added, and there’s a process underway to examine the situation and whether it demands a change.

In the meantime, “we call upon Mr. Putin to cease these horrible actions. Again, these are civilians and not combatants, and so they should not be targeted.”

New Details on Space Force PT Plan—Plus How the ‘Digital Community’ Could Look

March 17, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Space Force plans to officially implement a new “three-part fitness program” as its replacement for conventional PT testing by 2023, preceded by a yearlong “beta” phase in which Guardians will be able to evaluate the program, the service announced in a memo sent to service members on March 16.

The memo, signed by deputy chief of space operations for personnel Patricia Mulcahy, offers new details on the Space Force’s approach to fitness, which leaders have promised will be holistic, moving away from annual PT tests.

In the meantime, Guardians will have to complete one more “diagnostic fitness assessment” based on the Department of the Air Force’s Physical Fitness Program before the end of 2022. These assessments won’t be used to determine retention or promotion eligibility or as a basis for any sort of punishment, the memo states.

Meanwhile, the new program “promotes physical activity, lifestyle/performance medicine principles, and increased education and awareness to ensure all Guardians are mentally and physically prepared to perform.” It will use “wearable technology and a software solution paired with fitness/workout regimes and preventative health practices.”

The use of wearable fitness trackers has been hinted at before—top-level Guardians including Brig. Gen. Shawn N. Bratton, commander of Space Training and Readiness Command, STARCOM senior enlisted leader Chief Master Sgt. James P. Seballes, Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond, and Chief Master Sergeant of the Space Force Roger A. Towberman have all participated in a pilot program in which they wore rings to track things such as heart rate and sleep.

On the software solution front, the Space Force has signed a contract with fitness platform FitRankings “to create a digital community to connect fitness wearables,” according to a company press release.

FitRankings, based out of Austin, Texas, allows users to record their workouts on a personal profile and connect with other users in their community. USA Cycling, USA Triathlon, Under Armour, and grocery store chain H-E-B have all used the platform.

An example of a typical FitRankings user profile. Courtesy of FitRankings

“We agnostically connect to all of the latest wearables and fitness apps, wherever the market goes,” FitRankings CEO Patrick Hitchins told Air Force Magazine. “I think the military and DOD has probably looked at this space and probably struggled with the idea that, ‘well, do we have to go out and buy everyone a Garmin?’ And really, I think that’s the old school mentality for the military, like, ‘Hey, let’s go out and buy hardware.’

“What’s refreshing here in working with the Space Force and their senior leadership is they understand the need to actually invest in the software and platform first, and then the intent is to actually provide choice architecture to the Guardian to pick the wearable that they may want. But again, we connect to all of that.”

In addition to importing data from across a broad array of apps and trackers, FitRankings also has a way for organizations to standardize that data—to be able to give credit to users for a broad range of exercises.

MET minutes, or METs, calculate the intensity of an activity compared to a person’s resting state—the more intense the physical exertion, the more MET minutes. Using guidelines from the CDC, FitRankings incorporates MET minutes into its platforms, Hitchins said.

“What we’re working on is basically a way to take any activity, convert it to a universal metric called a MET minute, and then say, ‘Hey, we don’t care what type of activity you do. As long as you complete X number of MET minutes per week, you’re meeting a standard,’” Hitchins said. “Now, that’s still very TBD on what that looks like for the Space Force, and you can ask them, but I will say it’s a major base function of our platform.”

The Space Force has yet to say whether it will use MET minutes as a universal standard or what kinds of exercises it will require Guardians to do, if any, but leaders have indicated they want to take a more expansive approach than the standard aerobic run, sit-ups, and pushups that has defined the Air Force physical fitness program for decades—even the Air Force has shifted from that approach recently, introducing alternate exercises Airmen can perform as part of their PT test.

“The fact is the Air Force physical fitness program, I believe, dates back to 1947. And you can see the types of planes that were flown in 1947 and what we’re doing now, but by and large, the physical fitness program being around a once- or twice-a-year test, depending on the branch of the military, has not changed greatly,” Hitchins noted.

“I really feel like when I listened to the leadership of the Space Force, they understand that the human weapon system is the most important weapons system in the force. And really, I’m not going to speak on their behalf … but my feeling here is that the Space Force is really a new force trying to break with this model of a once-a-year, twice-a-year fitness test, to be a force of the future.”

Through FitRankings, organizations can start “challenges” in which groups or individuals can compete head-to-head to accomplish certain fitness goals. The platform also allows for users to publicly share their workouts and connect with other users, encouraging a “culture of fitness.” At the same time, users can adjust their profiles to remain publicly anonymous, to promote positivity and discourage public shaming.

At the same time, managers can have access to dashboards that show varying levels of data on the people they are supervising. The extent of that data can be adjusted to show only group-level totals or provide a general assessment of an individual’s fitness level—Towberman has raised the possibility that a Guardian’s wellness may be designated green, amber, or red “so that the chain of command and the Guardian know where they’re sitting all the time with regard to readiness.”

An example of an administrator/manager’s dashboard for USA Triathlon, another FitRankings client. Courtesy of FitRankings

Such a system may provide a more comprehensive overview than a yearly test, but it may also raise some concerns over privacy and sensitive data.

“For sure, it’s important,” Towberman said of privacy concerns. “Also, it’s sort of in the conditions of employment on the team, right? So as long as you understand what you’re getting into, I think you’ve got a lot less concern. We’re already using this type of technology in other communities where the desire to be in that community is strong enough to say, ‘Hey, I’ll let you know what my heart rate is every morning because I want to be part of this team.’ So I think there’s some of that, but really, this is pretty simple stuff. This is red light, yellow light, green light.”

Towberman added that the data the Space Force will track will be relatively broad, not honing in on Guardians’ specific habits.

That’s in line with what Hitchins believes is necessary to ensure buy-in from users.

“If you roll something out, and you’re saying, ‘Hey, guess what, connect up your Garmin or your Apple or your Oura ring, and now we’re just going to be watching you and tracking you,’ no one’s going to like that,” Hitchins said. “So the final part of my conversations is, how to create culture around this data that benefits the end user—the Soldier, the Guardian, etc.”

Former Vice Chief Hyten Joins Commission Studying Strategic Posture

March 17, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Retired Air Force Gen. John E. Hyten, former Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, will join a commission mandated by the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act looking into the U.S.’s nuclear policies and strategic posture, lawmakers announced March 16.

Hyten’s membership in the 12-person commission will mark one of his first public actions since retiring from the Vice Chairman position this past November. He was succeeded by Navy Adm. Christopher W. Grady.

The commission, as detailed in the 2022 NDAA, will be tasked with conducting “a review of the strategic posture of the United States, including a strategic threat assessment and a detailed review of nuclear weapons policy, strategy, and force structure and factors affecting the strategic stability of near-peer competitors of the United States,” the law states.

As part of that review, the commission will assess the current strategic posture and recommend the best posture moving forward and “the extent to which capabilities other than nuclear weapons can contribute to or detract from strategic stability.”

The commission will also issue a report and brief Congress on its findings no later than Dec. 31, 2022.

Prior to serving as Vice Chairman, Hyten commanded U.S. Strategic Command, overseeing the nation’s nuclear arsenal from 2016 to 2019. In that role, he watched as China rapidly modernized its own nuclear arsenal, building fields of intercontinental ballistic missile silos at a breakneck pace.

That construction wasn’t publicly revealed until 2021, but Hyten said it had previously been a top U.S. secret and demonstrated that “when you have a competitor like China—and Russia—that can move fast, you have to be able to move fast as well. And we still move way too slow.”

Hyten was picked for the commission by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Hyten will be joined by seven other individuals selected by the chairs and ranking members of the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, jointly announced March 16.

Several of those individuals will also be former Pentagon and State Department officials, including:

Leonor Tomero, who briefly served as deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear and missile defense policy before her position was eliminated in the fall of 2021 in a DOD reorganization that raised some eyebrows in Congress. Tomero was selected by Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.).
Madelyn Creedon, who worked both in the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) and as assistant secretary of defense for global strategic affairs, was selected by Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.).
Former Sen. John Kyl of Arizona, selected by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.).
Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, who previously served as administrator of the NNSA and undersecretary for nuclear security at the Department of Energy, selected by Inhofe.
Rose Gottemoeller, a former undersecretary for arms control and international security, selected by Smith.
Marshall S. Billingslea, who most recently served as the special presidential envoy for arms control, holding the rank of ambassador. Billingslea has also worked as deputy undersecretary of the Navy and assistant secretary general for defense investment at NATO. He was selected by Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.).
Rebeccah L. Heinrichs, a senior fellow at Hudson Institute specializing in U.S. national defense policy with a focus on strategic deterrence. Heinrichs was also picked by Rogers.

Zelensky Appeals for a No-Fly Zone, but Biden Pledges Only More Aid

March 16, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak, Abraham Mahshie and Greg Hadley

Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky made an emotional pitch directly to a joint session of Congress on March 16 to establish a no-fly zone over his beleaguered nation, but U.S. President Joe Biden, speaking a few hours later, declined to answer that request. Biden instead touted the more than $1 billion in aid for Ukraine appropriated in the past week and pledged a steady flow of other kinds of weapons and assistance for Ukrainians to fight their own fight.

Zelensky, appearing in a live video message, begged Biden to be “not only the leader of the free world” but also “the leader of peace,” and he asked for Russian-made S-300 air defense systems, new aircraft, and the no-fly zone.

“Is this too much to ask? … For a … humanitarian no-fly zone?” Zelensky said. “If it is, we offer an alternative. You know what kind of systems we need: S-300 and other similar systems.” He also asked for “aircraft that can help Ukraine … but they are on the ground, not in the Ukrainian sky.”

The U.S. does not have any Russian-made S-300 systems to offer, but Biden said that, at Zelensky’s request, “we have identified, and are helping Ukraine acquire, additional longer-range anti-aircraft systems and munitions for those systems.” Pentagon and diplomatic sources said discussions are taking place about transferring some S-300s from NATO countries that still have them, to be backfilled by American systems or other compensation.

Slovakia has S-300s and MiG-29s but won’t give them up until it has replacements in hand.

Slovak Ambassador to the U.S. Radovan Javorcik told Air Force Magazine that discussions are underway between Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and Slovak defense minister Jaroslav Nad about ways Slovakia can support Ukraine without undercutting its own defense needs.

“This is the largest military operation ever for Slovakia,” said Javorcik, describing the logistical effort to provide lethal and non-lethal aid to Ukraine.

“We’re … emptying our own warehouses in Slovakia and providing the Ukrainians with air defense [and] land-based things which can they use,” he said.

Across their common border, Slovakia has provided Ukraine with ammunition, rockets, rocket launchers, anti-tank and anti-missile systems, man-portable anti-aircraft missiles, de-mining equipment, and fuel for Ukraine’s air and ground vehicles.

To help backfill Slovakia’s air defenses, the Netherlands announced March 8 that it would deploy a Patriot air defense system there, but the system likely won’t be in place until April. Slovak pilots are training in the American F-16, but it won’t take delivery of those jets until next year.

Poland, which has done the most to facilitate weapons transfers to Ukraine, doesn’t have S-300s but does have Russian-made SA-8s and SA-12s.

The U.S. recently repositioned two Patriot missile defense systems from Germany to Poland to provide greater protection.

Asked if Poland would be willing to send its Russian air defense systems across the border, a Polish defense official said, “If those Patriot Systems stay permanently, certainly our [ministry of defense] can consider doing more.”

“It is easy to give [the] ‘green light,’ but this is something we have to do jointly,” the official added. “Poland is not shying away from doing its part.”

Quoting Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I have a dream” speech, Zelensky told Congress, “I have a dream … to protect Ukrainian skies.”

Midway through his speech, Zelensky showed a video of still and moving images, first of Ukrainians in idyllic, pastoral, and family settings, suddenly offset by graphic images of missile attacks, dead bodies, burning homes, morgues, and refugees. He invoked Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, 2001, saying that what America experienced on those days, Ukraine is experiencing every day.

The video was capped by the words, in English, “Close the sky over Ukraine.”

He also said that Ukraine is singularly shouldering a bloody fight for democracy and against autocracy and evil, and that all freedom-loving nations must come to its aid.

Zelensky offered profuse thanks for aid from America and other nations thus far but said that “it is not enough” and that his country can’t hold out indefinitely. He also demanded that new sanctions be introduced against Russia weekly; and that no Russian products should be allowed to enter American ports. His speech was greeted with three separate standing ovations from assembled lawmakers.

Biden praised the bravery of the Ukrainians and Zelensky personally, and promised the U.S would do all it could. America “is determined to make Putin pay a heavy price” for the invasion, he said. Economic sanctions on Russia will “only get more painful over time,” Biden said, noting that Russia’s economy is nearing collapse and that America is focused on “making sure Ukraine will never—never—be a victory for Putin.”

To that end, Biden said the U.S. has been providing weapons since last March and that the Ukrainians had them in hand when the invasion began. Over the past year, the U.S. has provided Kyiv with “hundreds of anti-air systems, thousands of anti-tank weapons, transport helicopters, high mobility vehicles, radar systems to track incoming artillery, and unmanned drones” as well as communications and satellite imagery analysis capability.

The U.S. has provided “9,000 anti-armor systems,” Biden said. “These are portable, high-accuracy, shoulder-mounted missiles that the Ukrainian forces have been using with great effect against invading tanks and armored vehicles.” Another 7,000 small arms have been provided—automatic rifles, shotguns, grenade launchers, and mortar rounds—as well as “20 million rounds in total” of ammunition.

Future assistance “will include drones, which demonstrates our commitment to sending our most cutting-edge systems to Ukraine for its defense,” Biden pledged. He did not name the unmanned systems to be sent. A White House fact sheet specified that “100 tactical unmanned aircraft” will be provided.

Ukraine does not have any American-made, remotely-piloted aircraft. Military experts later wondered if Biden meant he would send Ukraine more Turkish Bayraktar TB-2 drones, which the Ukrainians already have and have used productively, both in surveillance and target-designation mode.

Addressing himself to U.S. citizens, Biden said, “I want to be honest with you: This could be a long and difficult battle. But the American people will be steadfast in our support of the people of Ukraine in the face of Putin’s immoral, unethical attacks on the population. We are united in our abhorrence of Putin’s depraved onslaught.” He promised that the U.S. will “continue to have their backs” as Ukrainians fight to preserve their nation and freedom. He also pledged another $300 million in humanitarian assistance for the three million Ukrainian refugees now in other NATO countries; and thanked the allies and partners for both taking in the refugees and for “facilitating” the supply of materiel to Ukraine.

Lawmakers came away from Zelensky’s speech impressed and anxious to help.

“We must keep them in the fight,” said Rep. Ann Wagner (R-Mo.). Providing MiG-29s “that they have been requesting for some time is no different” than the aid and weaponry the U.S. has already provided, she said. “We must work with Poland to make that happen.”

Rep. Albio Spires (D-N.J.) said he’s “frustrated” and doesn’t understand “why people are so afraid to go against” Putin. Zelensky is “the only guy that’s giving Putin a black eye.” Given Russia’s annexation of Crimea, land grabs in Georgia, and intervention in Syria, “we need to support Zelensky as much as we can to punch [Putin] out and realize he can’t do this to the people of the world.” Sires said he’d support “any kind of effort” to support Ukraine.

The Foreign Affairs Committee “will be looking at … authorization of use of military force” in Europe, said Rep. Bill Keating (D-Mass.).

Rep. Mike Rogers, House Armed Services ranking member, said that although Zelensky was addressing Congress, the White House was his intended audience.

“I call on President Biden to stop staring at the problem and provide the capabilities President Zelensky specifically asked for,” Rogers said. These include air defenses like the S-300s and unmanned aerial systems, such as multiple variants of the Switchblade UAS. I want to see the Biden administration get Ukraine these weapon systems immediately.”

A No-Fly Zone Isn’t an Umbrella—It’s War, Former Northern Watch Commander Says

March 16, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

A no-fly zone is neither a simple nor a risk-free approach to helping Ukraine, according to retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies and a former commander of the Northern Watch no-fly zone over Iraq.

Deptula said he heard nothing new from either Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky or U.S. President Joe Biden on a no-fly zone over Ukraine in their March 16 speeches but pointed out that such a thing is “not some magical way to disperse an enemy without bloodshed.” A no-fly zone is war, he said.

It’s “full-on, direct and sustained combat with enemy forces,” he asserted. Those glibly proposing it likely don’t really appreciate what’s involved, he added.

A no-fly zone would require the answers to myriad questions that have scarcely been asked, let alone answered, Deptula said. What would be the rules of engagement? Would only Russian aircraft be targeted? Could they be targeted only over Ukraine, or over Russia, from where they could launch their missiles at ground targets?

“You have to define … the end state,” he said. “What’s the desired outcome?” Who would be the authority deciding what to shoot and what not to shoot? Would Russian aircraft on the ground be a fair target? What about search and track radars? Pilots, he said, are permitted under the Geneva Convention to defend themselves if fired upon, or if they detect preparations to shoot at them.

Would helicopters be fair game? What about cruise missiles launched from outside Ukrainian airspace?

“And who’s in charge?” Deptula wondered. “The Ukrainian military? NATO? The individual air forces? Because every air force in this coalition is probably going to have different rules of engagement.”

During operations Northern and Southern Watch, Deptula noted, coalition pilots rarely shot at airborne enemy aircraft, but, when fired upon or radar-painted from the ground, the riposte—not always the same day—would be to destroy surface-to-air missile sites, tracking radars, artillery sites, command and control targets, and others. The Iraq no-fly zone was not a “24/7, 365” affair but more frequently three or four days a week of patrols, he said.

Accompanying the fighters would have to be an armada of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft, command and control aircraft, sensor aircraft, communications planes, and aerial tankers, among others, he noted. Using all that against Russian airplanes would likely be, as Biden has previously said, engaging in World War III.

The summary question, Deptula asserted, is, “Where does it stop?”

All that said, Putin, “like all bullies,” will not stop unless the European nations and NATO stand up to him, Deptula argued. Deptula is in favor of ex-Warsaw Pact/now NATO countries providing their Russian-made aircraft and munitions to Ukraine. It would be very much like “Lend Lease” in World War II, he said, and a fair way to help Ukraine defend itself. He sees little distinction between massive lethal aid in the form of small arms, anti-tank missiles, and anti-aircraft systems and the larger gear.

The State Department clamped down on Poland’s offer to transfer its Russian-made gear to Ukraine because of Poland’s awkward wording of the offer, making the aircraft seem to come from the U.S., Deptula speculated. The offer came after Secretary of State Antony Blinken explicitly gave Poland the “green light” to make it, and Deptula thinks the idea’s not dead, yet.

“It could have been done quietly,” he said. But it still could be done.

“It’s not a silver bullet,” he said, and will not suddenly give Ukraine a victory, but “it will assist them in sustaining their aircraft,” even if the Polish MiGs are just used for parts.

“If they just use them to keep the aircraft they have in service, that’s helpful,” he said.

Air Force Verges on New Climate Action Plan as European Bases Face Energy Crisis

March 16, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Department of the Air Force is “on the cusp” of releasing a climate action plan that will detail its current and future efforts for renewable, resilient energy, the department’s installations czar told lawmakers March 16. The plan will come as officials grow increasingly anxious about Russia’s impact on the global energy market.

Edwin Oshiba, the acting assistant secretary of the Air Force for energy, installations, and the environment, didn’t specify to the House Armed Services readiness subcommittee exactly when the action plan would be released, but he promised that it would be “aligned with our operational imperatives to enhance resiliency and readiness while balancing mission effectiveness and fiscal efficiency.”

“It will lay out priorities and actionable objectives to address the challenges of a changing climate through improving operational energy efficiency, enhancing installation resilience, diversifying energy sources, and developing a climate literate force,” Oshiba added.

The issue of energy efficiency and resilience in the military has been raised by experts, lawmakers, and Pentagon officials before. But it has taken on new urgency in light of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and subsequent sanctions from President Joe Biden that have banned the import of Russian oil and other energy sources.

“You don’t need to look any further than today’s headlines to know that energy can be used as a weapon,” noted Meredith Berger, assistant secretary of the Navy for energy, installations, and the environment, in her testimony.

The issue is most pressing in Europe, where Russia has typically exported a vast amount of energy in the form of gas, coal, and other sources. In particular, countries such as Italy and Germany have experienced an energy crisis as of late with their Russian imports drying up—and the Air Force has locations in both nations.

Right now, those bases are dependent on the local energy sources, said Paul Cramer, acting assistant secretary of defense for energy, installations, and environment. But the current crisis is highlighting the need to bolster that approach.

“We are dependent and reliant on the host nation, regardless of whether it’s in Germany, Italy, and [in] the Pacific, for that fuel source, because even if we ran our own, we would still have to use that same source,” Cramer said. “And so the priority within the department is to build resilience to reduce that hazard. So you have multiple sources of power, not relying on one source of power. So we’ve really emphasized over the last few years microgriding so that we can create grids within grids and not rely on that; alternate sources of fuels where we have installed renewables. And to the extent that we can’t work any of those to have some redundant system to continue to operate, we’re going to get [to] the point where we’re going to produce our own electricity.”

The Air Force has been studying energy independence and resilience for installations for some time. The 2020 National Defense Authorization Act required that “major military installations plan for climate change when drafting master plans,” and the department subsequently conducted more than 80 initial assessments by July 2021.

Since then, Oshiba said, the department has published 42 installation energy plans, with 16 more coming in fiscal 2022. Those plans are “focused upon resiliency measures for installations around five key areas: robustness, resourcefulness, redundancy, response, and recovery.”

Elsewhere, the service continues to conduct “pull-the-plug” exercises to ensure it can identify vulnerabilities to infrastructure, particularly for energy and water. The department is also doing “some exciting things” to reduce its operational energy costs, by far its largest account when it comes to fuel costs.

“There’s been some work that’s been going on over the last couple of years in testing drag-reduction technologies primarily for our mobility and refilling assets,” Oshiba said. “Things like micro-veins and winglets that allow us to extend the range of our assets that provides operational reach with fewer assets, and what we call create more, if you will, loiter time to refuel our fighter assets once they’re in those refueling tracks.”

NATO to Add Support for Ukraine, Set Up ‘Persistent’ Presence on Eastern Flank

March 16, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

NATO defense ministers decided March 16 that they will augment military, financial, and humanitarian support to Ukraine and that they will drastically increase longer-term defenses for NATO’s once-neglected eastern flank.

But NATO still opposes direct intervention in Ukraine or a no-fly zone.

“Today, ministers agreed that we must continue to provide significant support to Ukraine,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said at a press briefing in Brussels following the ministerial.

The secretary-general underscored NATO’s position that it will not send in troops and not enforce a no-fly zone despite repeated calls by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who has taken to making direct appeals to the legislative bodies of the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States, virtually addressing the U.S. Congress on March 16.

“They reinforced the message of the importance of providing support with equipment, advanced equipment, air defense systems, anti-tank weapons, and many other types of support, but no NATO deployment of air or ground capabilities in Ukraine,” Stoltenberg added. “We have a responsibility to ensure that this conflict, this war, doesn’t escalate beyond Ukraine.”

In remarks before the start of the meeting, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III said the unscheduled defense ministerial was proof of a united NATO in support of Ukraine.

“Our presence here sends a signal for the world that we remain united in our support of Ukraine,” Austin said. “We condemn Russia’s unprovoked and unjustified invasion into Ukraine.”

Austin again reiterated the U.S. commitment to NATO’s Article 5 principle of collective defense. The United States has some 100,000 troops in Europe. NATO has at its command 40,000 troops from member states, of which the majority are positioned in the east.

Stoltenberg said that will not be enough going forward.

“We must reset our collective defense and deterrence for the longer term,” he said.

Military commanders have been tasked with developing plans across all domains, including “substantially more forces in the eastern part of the alliance, at higher readiness.”

Stoltenberg said it was not until Russia invaded Ukraine and annexed Crimea in 2014 that NATO began to strengthen its eastern defense, and not until 2016 did NATO begin to position combat troops in the east.

Stoltenberg said there would be more pre-positioned equipment and supplies, strengthened integrated air and missile defense, and more allied airpower. At sea, it would mean carrier strike groups, submarines, and combat ships on a “persistent basis.” More training and exercises, and in greater numbers, will follow.

Asked if the forces to be positioned on the eastern flank would be permanent, Stoltenberg demurred, saying that was a political decision.

A NATO eastern flank official told Air Force Magazine that NATO is doing “more of the same” and that the Pentagon is “still rather cautious in long-term posture considerations.”

NATO heads of state will meet March 24 to discuss the changes needed for the alliance’s longer-term security. President Joe Biden is expected to attend the meeting in Brussels.

Stoltenberg also said there are no signs that Russia is serious about a cease-fire in its peace talks with Ukraine.

“On the ground, we don’t see any sign, and that’s the reason why we also call on Russia to engage in these talks in good faith,” he said.

“What Ukraine can achieve around the negotiating table is very closely linked to the situation on the battleground,” Stoltenberg added. “Therefore the support we give to them to stand up against and to resist the Russian invasion also helps them to achieve an acceptable outcome in the negotiations.”

Budget Predictions: ACE Gets Big Boost in ’23; Large Uncrewed Aircraft Fleets Needed

March 16, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force is proposing a large budget investment in pre-positioned equipment to lay the groundwork for its agile combat employment concept, which calls for USAF forces to be widely dispersed and frequently moving to complicate enemy targeting, Pacific Air Forces commander Gen. Kenneth S. Wilsbach reported.

He also forecast a major investment in uncrewed and “attritable” aircraft and decoys, both to bolster USAF capacity and to present an enemy with a large number of must-shoot targets that would rapidly draw down enemy magazines; and pitched for cargo UAVs to provide logistics support to far-flung ACE operating locations.

“There’s quite a bit of money in the [fiscal year] ’23 budget, when we finally get to start pre-positioning equipment, and parts, supplies, food and water, fuel, those kind of things,” Wilsbach said during a March 14 Mitchell Institute webcast. This will alleviate an excessive demand on airlift, he said, because “if you pre-position those things, at least initially, [those are] places that you don’t have to have airlift going in, immediately supplying parts and supplies, etc. So, we’re going to have very robust pre-positioning at numerous locations around the theater.”

The ACE concept of employment was published in December and tells wing commanders how to “train to it every day” and how the concept will be implemented in PACAF and U.S. Air Forces Europe; and “what the expectations will be,” he said. “That document has been instrumental in allowing everybody to get ready and be able to win when you get there.”

In the recent Cope North exercise out of Guam, ACE concepts were employed at 10 different operating locations, incorporating several countries, he said. The exercise “moved those assets around … on a daily basis,” and they were commanded and controlled at the same time.

Japan and Australia are both keenly interested in developing their own compatible versions of ACE, he said, “particularly the Japanese, who are really trying to expand their envelope and ACE … on mainland Japan. So that’s really exciting for us, because we intend to do ACE with them, if we ever have to.” Australia is doing similar things, and is a “great partner” in the concept.

The two enabling concepts for ACE are logistics and command and control, he said, because of the “contested environment.”

There won’t be enough C-17s to go around to service all the operating locations, he said, meaning C-130s will carry a greater share of the burden. That makes sense because exercises so far have found that most of the airlift required is to carry small, line-replaceable unit parts and other objects the size of a jet engine or smaller.

“If we’re relying on the C-17 fleet to do this, we’ll run out of C-17s very quickly,” he said, especially since the strategic transports will probably be needed for noncombatant evacuation operations and to move forces into the theater. There aren’t enough C-17s even when the C-17s of allies are added to the mix.

“And you would waste the capability because, like I said, often it’s just a line replaceable unit that has to go out to an island somewhere, and you don’t need a whole C-17 to take a piece that big. So, C-130s will be a big factor in this.” A C-130 squadron at Yokota Air Base, Japan, is “frequently [doing] ACE iterations, and … they participate in the exercises as well.”

Wilsbach said he’s been “advocating for a few years for something even smaller than a C-130” that could take a person or an engine or a few parts.

“Perhaps it might even be an unmanned vehicle … but have a lot of them,” he said.

The concept is similar to the C-47s of World War II, he explained.

“There were … thousands, maybe, of C-47s, and they were all over the Pacific. And they weren’t fast, but they can carry a lot, and they tackled the logistics problem of the Pacific by having a lot of tails to … move equipment.” Although “it got there at 120, maybe 150 knots … it worked. We could have something like that for ACE, where you don’t have to have it going 500 knots,” but the logistics effort wouldn’t “eat a lot of tail numbers to be able to get the small bits of equipment and pieces to the various spots that we intend to deploy from.”

The flip side of the ACE coin is communications, Wilsbach said, calling it “pretty difficult to do” and fragile because lines of communication can be cut.

“What I’ve been asking for—and what we’re working on and approving—is a meshed, rather than network,” model, he said. He made the analogy to the human brain, which, if injured, “figures it out and finds different paths” to move messages and information around, and heal itself.

“It just happens,” he said, and with artificial intelligence and machine learning, the same will be true of the communications system the Air Force is now building for ACE.

“We want it to be self-healing so that operators aren’t working the comm gear, they’re operating and [figuring] out how to create airpower effects and executing those airpower effects, not switching frequencies and figuring out where the comm could go through.”

Wilsbach said that “if you tackle those two things—logistics and communications—ACE becomes a little more easy. It’ll still be difficult, but it’ll be easier than if we struggle with those two aspects.”

More UAVs Needed

Uncrewed aircraft will also be critical to the fight, Wilsbach said.

China’s ability to defend itself is “very robust” because of its elaborate anti-access/area denial air defense systems, he noted. The only way to “stress” those defenses is with large numbers of attritable aircraft, he said.

“What I would advocate for is to make the manned aircraft ‘exquisite’” in their capabilities “and the uninhabited aircraft … less exquisite, slightly more attritable, so that we can have more of them,” he said.

China would have to target decoys or unmanned aircraft coming toward it “because they’re not exactly sure” what those platforms are, he said, and “they’ll shoot weapons at [them] and use up their weapons.” Employing such swarmed, massed aircraft “could give you an advantage because [China would] use up their resources, shooting things that you don’t care that they shoot down. So that would be a capacity that I’m very interested in, as we go into the future.”

Not all of these unmanned aircraft should be stealthy, he said; otherwise, China would not see them and use up weapons against them.

“You give them a lot more targets to defend against,” he said. The Chinese would ignore these aircraft at their peril, because they would be equipped with sensors and weapons that could penetrate and destroy Chinese assets.

“All of these assets will have some kind of capability, whether it be a sensor … weapon truck, jammer … and they should swarm as well, so they should talk to one another and collaborate not only amongst themselves, but also with the manned platform that they’re supporting,” Wilsbach said. All this will present China with “many more dilemmas than they can handle at any given time. And what we’ve seen in exercises is, when you amass the effects, and we amass the number of weapons that are going after a particular target, they’ll be able to shoot down some—because as I’ve said, they have really good defenses—but they won’t be able to shoot them all down. And it’s the weapon that creates the final effect that you’re looking for that counts.”

Somalia Drawdown Has Been Ineffective, ‘Puts Troops at Greater Risk,’ AFRICOM Boss Says

March 15, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

It’s been more than 15 months since then-President Donald Trump ordered the Pentagon to withdraw the majority of its troops from Somalia. Since then, service members have had to “commute to work,” flying in from places such as Kenya and Djibouti to help train Somali forces and conduct operations against al-Shabab, the terrorist group that is part of al-Qaeda.

That setup, the head of U.S. Africa Command told lawmakers March 15, isn’t working.

“Our periodic engagement, also referred to as commuting to work, has caused new challenges and risks for our troops,” Army Gen. Stephen J. Townsend told the Senate Armed Services Committee. “My assessment is that it is not effective; it’s not efficient; and it puts our troops at greater risk.”

Townsend has expressed dissatisfaction with the situation before. In April 2021, he told the SASC that “our understanding of what is happening in Somalia is less now than when we were there on the ground physically located with our partners.” But Townsend also said at the time that “we’re working to make this new mode of operation work.”

In his written testimony this year, Townsend warned that “Somalia’s slow but continued steps towards stability stalled over the past year.”

At the same time, Townsend also called al-Shabab al-Qaeda’s “largest and wealthiest global affiliate” and Africa’s greatest threat to U.S. people and interests in the region and to the U.S. homeland.

With a reduced presence—less than 100 troops are still on the ground—the counterterrorism mission to combat al-Shabab has struggled, Townsend said.

“We are marching in place at best. We may be backsliding,” Townsend said. “I just think that what we’re doing is not providing sufficient pressure, and the best we can do is maintain a secure area around the bases that we return to when we really can’t get at the al-Shabab problems.”

Asked by Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) whether he had asked his chain of command to restore the U.S. presence in Somalia to combat al-Shabab, Townsend declined to say but offered a hint.

“Respectfully, Senator, I have submitted advice to my chain of command, and my chain of command is still considering that advice,” Townsend said. “And I’d like to give them space to make that decision.”

Townsend has led AFRICOM for more than two-and-a-half years now, and Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) noted in his opening statement that he will likely leave the post in the coming months—no AFRICOM commander has served for more than three-and-a-half years.

While al-Shabab represents a growing threat inside the continent, Russian mercenaries are an outside factor that continue to concern Townsend and lawmakers.

So-called private military companies such as the Wagner Group are “a malign influence,” Townsend said. “They don’t follow anybody’s rules. They do what they want. They buttress dictators. They do gross violations of human rights. I think it’s bad for Africa’s security and prosperity in the future.”

Alarm over the use of such groups in the region has exploded in recent months—officials commonly believe they are connected to the Kremlin and are used strategically to leverage Russia’s larger interests in Africa.

Noting these assessments, Townsend said members of the Wagner Group “essentially run the Central African Republic” and have recently arrived in Mali in West Africa. They also are deployed in Libya and Sudan, where they extract natural resources and disrupt partnerships.

Their presence presents a number of challenges to American efforts in Africa, Townsend added.

“First, for example, overflight permissions—so with a continent as vast as Africa, we absolutely depend on air movement for everything,” Townsend said. “And when we see Wagner move in, they impose overflight restrictions, either through the government withdrawing permissions for overflight, or in the case of Libya, Wagner importing sophisticated advanced surface-to-air missile systems to protect their activities there but also deny the airspace.

“… Secondly, usurping partnerships. So as we’ve seen happen just now in Mali. The Malian government has asked the French forces to depart and instead have invited in this Russian [private military company]. And I think that is disturbing. It’s impacting our partnership with that same government as well. And I think that’s not good for Mali’s future.”

When asked what AFRICOM is doing to counter the influence of these mercenary groups, Townsend said his command has conducted information operations, “shining a spotlight” on their actions, while also counseling allies and partners not to allow such groups within their borders.

Ultimately, however, Townsend expressed optimism that such groups would be less impactful in the long run.

“An example … is in Libya, where they have worn out their welcome there. And the Libyans, even the Libyans who the Russians supported in the Civil War, now want them to depart,” Townsend said. “So, actually, I think that they’re probably their own worst enemy.”