Department of the Air Force Announces Candidates for STARCOM Headquarters

Department of the Air Force Announces Candidates for STARCOM Headquarters

April 4, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Six bases are being considered as the eventual home for the Space Force’s Space Training and Readiness Command, the Department of the Air Force announced April 4.

All five of the locations currently designated as Space Force Bases are under consideration—Buckley, Peterson, and Schriever in Colorado; Patrick in Florida; and Vandenberg in California. In addition, Los Angeles Air Force Base, which is set to be renamed Los Angeles Space Force Base, is a contender.

Site surveys of the bases will begin in late April or early May 2022, DAF said in a release, with assessments based on “mission, infrastructure capacity, community support, environmental considerations, and cost.”

At the moment, STARCOM is transitionally based at Peterson, in Colorado Springs, Colo. 

In addition to STARCOM’s headquarters, the department also detailed the state of the basing decisions for the five Deltas that help make up the field command.

Delta 1, which is focused on training, is permanently located at Vandenberg Space Force Base. 

Delta 10, focused on wargaming and doctrine, only has one candidate location being considered—Patrick Space Force Base, “because of its proximity to a Department of Defense modeling and simulation capability with resident space expertise,” according to DAF. Delta 10 is temporarily located at the U.S. Air Force Academy.

Deltas 11 and 12, focused on range and aggression and test and evaluation, respectively, have the same two candidate locations: Schriever Space Force Base and Kirtland Air Force Base, N.M. Both locations “offer existing range infrastructure that supports test, training, and exercise activities within close distance to range and aggressor stakeholders,” according to the department release. Delta 11’s temporary location is Schriever, Delta 12’s is Peterson.

Delta 13, focused on education, doesn’t have any candidate locations at the moment. The Department of the Air Force said it will conduct a strategic basing process for the Delta after the Space Force establishes its curriculum and structure. It is currently based out of Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala.

Site surveys for Deltas 10, 11, and 12, will finish in 2022, the department said.

STARCOM was the last of the Space Force’s three field commands to stand up, and it’s the last still looking for a permanent headquarters—Space Operations Command is headquartered at Peterson Space Force Base, and Space Systems Command is headquartered at Los Angeles Air Force Base.

Air Force graphic
F-16s to Serve Nearly Two More Decades, Replacement Choice Still 6-8 Years Away

F-16s to Serve Nearly Two More Decades, Replacement Choice Still 6-8 Years Away

April 4, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Additional budget documents set to be released later this month will start to map an improvement program for the F-16, to support that type serving almost another two decades, the service’s deputy chief of staff for plans and programs said. USAF doesn’t have to decide on what the F-16’s replacement will be until 2028 or later, he added.

The F-16 will be ideal for a variety of missions not requiring high-end stealth and survivability, Lt. Gen. David S. Nahom told Air Force Magazine in an interview. The jet will continue to be USAF’s low-end, multipurpose force builder.

The F-16 can be that “one airplane that can do a lot of low-end missions, and remarkably cheaper than a fifth-generation platform, and it can do them well,” he said. It can “satisfy an objective in the Middle East and a week later, fly [combat air patrol] over a point on the U.S., and do a homeland defense sortie. It’s pretty amazing. And do that at half … [the] operating cost of any other air platform we have out there.”

Nahom asserted that, “There’s a utility to that. That’s why you’re seeing the investment in the post-block, our latest-model F-16s. Because we think we can get another 18-20 years out of them.”

The A-10, he said, is a good close air support platform for increasingly rare situations where air defenses are thoroughly suppressed or nonexistent.

“But can it do homeland defense? Well, no. …There’s a lot of things an F-16 can do. And I’ll tell you, it does pretty good CAS, too.” The Air Force has limited resources, he said, and so it makes more sense to invest in an F-16 fleet that can do a host of missions rather than the A-10, which “can only do one.”

Rather than a high-low mix, Nahom said USAF’s future fighter force structure would be better described as a bell curve with the bulk being low/medium capability F-16s and medium/high capability F-35s. At the very low end would be a small number of aircraft only able to operate in permissive environments while the upper end would be aircraft like the F-22 and the Next-Generation Air Dominance fighter, tuned to the most demanding conditions.

“So now, the question is, what replaces” the F-16, Nahom said.

“Let’s fast forward to the 2035/2036-ish timeframe. Is there still a need for that low-cost platform? I think, right now, there is,” he said. “And what does it look like? Do we replace it with another F-16-looking thing? Did the F-35 come down in cost enough where we can buy more of them? Is it something else? Is it unmanned at that point, because we can do things differently?”

All of that, he said, is “a question for another day. The good thing is, we don’t have to do anything right now. We’ve got 18-20 years of life left on 600-plus F-16s that are doing great work for our nation.” The decision on how it will be replaced is “probably six, eight years away,” he said.

In the meantime, USAF can concentrate on “getting the F-35 right,” recapitalizing squadrons with F-35s and F-15EXs, and increasing the overall capacity of the force, while developing the “NGAD family of systems and upgrading the [F-22] Raptor in the meantime.”

The Air Force doesn’t have to make any decisions about a near-term, low-cost manned platform because it has the post-block F-16s, Nahom said. And, though he acknowledged the modifications are “expensive,” he said, “for what we’ll get out of that airplane, it’s well-spent money.”

Nahom did not discuss what improvements will be coming for the F-16 or whether it will need yet another Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) structural upgrade.

A year ago, the Air Force began discussing its “4+1” fighter roadmap, which forecast a new fighter to succeed the F-16 in the 2030s. Called the “MR-X,” the fighter was notionally described as being “able to affordably perform missions short of high-end warfare.” It would be digitally designed and optimized with capability described as being “generation 4.5,” meaning short of a full stealth platform, to keep its cost down. Documents supporting the roadmap said the F-35 could be that aircraft if its purchase price could be “brought significantly lower,” or the MR-X could be a clean-sheet design built on the rapid turnover plan envisioned for the NGAD, in which new iterations or leap-frog designs appear about every five years.

Nahom said it’s essential to get out of the A-10 business on the planned schedule because the Air Force needs the manpower to maintain and support new platforms like the F-35 and NGAD.

“At some point, we’ve got to move the people that are operating and maintaining A-10s into the F-35s that are actively coming off the line right now,” he said. With unlimited funds, “we’d keep the A-10 as long as we could,” but the service must make choices and it is choosing a fleet that is the most versatile, he asserted.

Air Force Switches to Airman Leadership Qualities-based Feedback Forms

Air Force Switches to Airman Leadership Qualities-based Feedback Forms

April 4, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

The Air Force replaced the Airman Comprehensive Assessment with a new Airman Leadership Qualities feedback form, which Chief of Staff Gen. Charles Q. Brown Jr has said will change how the service measures, motivates, and rewards service members.

The move is the latest by USAF leadership to integrate the Airman Leadership Qualities (ALQ) into the service’s training, feedback, and evaluation systems. The ALQs were first introduced in February 2021 and at the time were part of an optional companion document to the Airman Comprehensive Assessment, only for senior noncommissioned officers and officers from O-1 to O-6.

Now, the ALQ-based feedback will be mandatory for all Airmen across the Total Force; any ACAs not completed and signed by March 30 were automatically converted to ALQ feedback forms.

“Supervisors must complete ALQ feedback with their Airmen to access enlisted evaluations closing Sept. 30, 2022, or later, and officer evaluations closing Oct. 31, 2022, or later,” according to an Air Force Personnel Center release.

The Airman Leadership Qualities are broken down into four major categories—executing the mission, leading people, managing resources, and improving the unit—and include job proficiency, initiative, adaptability, inclusion and teamwork, emotional intelligence, communication, stewardship, accountability, decision making, and innovation. 

The ALQs will also form the basis for new officer and enlisted evaluation systems, which are slated to be released in late 2022 or early 2023, the AFPC release states. That marks a slight delay—in December, the service said the new evaluation systems would be released “later in 2022.”

These moves coincide with other changes to Air Force personnel management, such as the introduction of the new-look fitness test with alternate exercises and changes to how Enlisted Performance Reports are scored in the Enlisted Evaluation System. The service also unveiled its new Enlisted Force Development Action Plan on Jan. 12, outlining 28 force development objectives to be completed over the next two years.

For now, the ALQ-based feedback forms can be found in myEval, the new digital application the Air Force is switching to for its evaluation and feedback systems.

The Space Force, meanwhile, will continue to use the current feedback and evaluation programs as it continues to develop policies of its own.

B-52 Flies with F-22s, Nine Other Nations Over Middle East in Bomber Task Force Mission

B-52 Flies with F-22s, Nine Other Nations Over Middle East in Bomber Task Force Mission

April 4, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

A USAF B-52 flew through the U.S. Central Command area of responsibility on March 29, integrating with American F-22s and aircraft from nine other countries over the Middle East, U.S. Air Forces Central Command announced April 2.

The B-52 bomber, assigned to the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot Air Force Base, N.D., flew over the East Mediterranean, Arabian Peninsula, and Red Sea after taking off from RAF Fairford in the United Kingdom, where it is deployed as part of a bomber task force mission.

The F-22s, from the 1st Fighter Wing at Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Va., that joined the bomber have been in CENTCOM since February—a squadron deployed to the United Arab Emirates to respond to recent drone and missile strikes by Iranian-backed Yemeni Houthi rebels.

A KC-10 also joined the mission, refueling the B-52 over Saudi Arabia, according to images released by AFCENT.

The B-52 also flew with nine other nations’ aircraft, AFCENT commander Lt. Gen. Gregory M. Guillot said in a statement. According to official images released by AFCENT and other nations’ ministries of defense, those included Typhoons from the Royal Air Force, F-15s from the Israeli Air Force, F-15s from the Royal Saudi Air Force, F-15s from the Qatar Emiri Air Force, and F-16s and Typhoons from the Royal Air Force of Oman.

“With each bomber task force mission, [AFCENT] and partner air forces demonstrate the strength of regional airpower,” Guillot said in a statement “An unprecedented nine countries flew with our B-52 today, so this mission clearly signaled our ability to quickly bring forces to the theater and operate seamlessly with our partners during a training event that signals our combined commitment to regional stability and defense.” 

This is the second Bomber Task Force mission to fly in CENTCOM this year—the first took place Feb. 14, when a Minot B-52 flew from RAF Fairford and integrated with a pair of Marine Corps F/A-18s.

Senator: Delays to Picking Space Command HQ Pose Risk to National Security

Senator: Delays to Picking Space Command HQ Pose Risk to National Security

April 4, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

U.S. Space Command won’t reach its full operational capability for years if its headquarters moves to Alabama as planned, a U.S. senator contends—but the already-two-year-old command could get to FOC as soon as the end of 2022 if it stays at its temporary home in Colorado.

In fact, Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) told Air Force Magazine the command could have already reached FOC by now if not for the uncertainty surrounding where it will call its permanent home.

Both the Defense Department inspector general and Government Accountability Office are investigating the Trump administration’s decision to base the U.S.’s newest unified combatant command at Redstone Arsenal, Ala. 

Getting to FOC sooner matters because the military’s vulnerabilities in space affect “almost every aspect of our national security,” Hickenlooper said—even “our ability to deal with the Russian aggression you see in Ukraine.”

As for the five years he estimated the command could take to get to FOC in Alabama:  “We don’t have that time, in my opinion,” Hickenlooper said. “We need all hands on deck right now.”

Hickenlooper addressed the basing decision on the sidelines of touring a small company: Advanced Space of Westminster, Colo., which has an agreement with the Air Force Research Laboratory to share data from a mission to chart cislunar orbits for NASA.

The Department of the Air Force twice searched for U.S. Space Command’s permanent home base after it became the military’s 11th unified combatant command in 2019. The administration scrapped one list of finalists before then-Defense Secretary Mark T. Esper adopted a different process in which local communities got to make pitches. 

Members of Colorado’s congressional delegation have said former President Donald J. Trump gave the headquarters to Alabama “for political reasons,” and after his presidency ended, Trump took credit for the decision.

The command has awaited the outcome of the investigations from its temporary home at Peterson Space Force Base in Colorado Springs. Peterson was considered a favorite for the permanent basing decision because of its close connection to the Space Force and Air Force space activities historically.

“We can’t just kind of play politics and kick the can down the road like we’ve been doing,” Hickenlooper said. “We need to take things like Space Command, that have a mission that’s vitally important to this country, and make sure we do everything we can to get them full operational capability ASAP.” 

Hickenlooper said he didn’t think the search process took into account the time to get to FOC. 

Commander of U.S. Space Command Gen. James H. Dickinson said in congressional testimony March 4 that the basing decision is holding him back from getting to FOC “as quickly as possible.”

Though no matter the location, he estimated that the command is “a couple-three years away” from FOC “based on many things,” including “attracting the right expertise within the command, and making sure that I have trained those processes and procedures within the command to be able to do the entire mission set that I have been given.”

Meanwhile, the projected size of the command has shrunk, Hickenlooper said, suggesting it wouldn’t require any new construction at Peterson.

He and eight other members of Colorado’s congressional delegation addressed a letter to President Joe Biden on March 22, pointing out the national security implications of delaying FOC and urging the President to take into account the forthcoming findings of both investigations. 

The letter cites the urgency of U.S. European Command’s “efforts to monitor and respond to the situation in Ukraine” as well as the threat posed by Russia’s launch of an anti-satellite weapon in November 2021 that resulted in a problematic cloud of debris in low Earth orbit.

“As Russia’s war on Ukraine evolves, it is vital for USSPACECOM to maintain operational continuity, and achieve FOC without delay,” the lawmakers wrote. “We remain concerned that moving the combatant command headquarters will slow the progress toward full capability—a delta we cannot afford at this fraught geopolitical moment in history.”

“If we made up our mind tomorrow that that’s what we wanted to do, we could have them at full operational capability by the end of the year,” Hickenlooper said, referring to keeping the command in Colorado.

Gen. Frank Gorenc (Ret.): We Must Have an F-35 Engine Competition to Accelerate Change

Gen. Frank Gorenc (Ret.): We Must Have an F-35 Engine Competition to Accelerate Change

April 4, 2022

“When markets are competitive,” a new Department of Defense report says, “the Department reaps the benefits through improved cost, schedule, and performance for the products and services needed to support national defense.” The report also states that competition leads to a healthier industrial base, more innovation, and ultimately, better national security.

“We hear a clear call from the Air Force to ‘accelerate change.’ Competition is a great way to do it,” says Gen. Frank Gorenc (Ret.). “We have an opportunity in the near-term to introduce competition through a new engine for the world’s most advanced fighter, the F-35.”

Gen. Gorenc, who accumulated nearly 5,000 flight hours in his distinguished Air Force career, knows well the asymmetric advantage the U.S. holds in jet engine manufacturing. He wants to keep it that way.

There is widespread acknowledgement that the current engine won’t be able to accommodate the F-35’s future capabilities—hence Gorenc’s call for competition. The adaptive cycle engines currently being tested through the Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP) would offer game-changing capability for the F-35 and enable future capabilities for decades into the future. Engine manufacturers GE (who Gorenc consults for) and Pratt & Whitney are AETP’s two participants.

The Air Force’s stated goals for AETP engines include 25% better fuel efficiency, 10% more thrust, and double the thermal management capability over today’s engines. Those are eye-popping numbers to Gorenc. Having served in a number of high-ranking Air Force positions following his flying career, he recognizes the strategic options that kind of performance would open up for the Air Force.

That’s why he’s “really encouraged” by the request for information the Air Force released in January for the F-35 Adaptive Engine Replacement (FAER) program, as well as the continued investment in AETP requested in the Fiscal Year 2023 budget. It signals serious interest in bringing an adaptive cycle engine to the F-35, according to Gorenc.

“Moving forward from that RFI to an RFP for an Engineering and Manufacturing Development program is the only way to introduce a competition for F-35 propulsion. An upgrade to the existing engine means no competition. The Air Force has invested $4 billion-plus in industry since 2007 to bring these adaptive engines online. You have two companies that received equal contracts to build and test adaptive cycle engines, they both have, and now we have an opportunity to reap all the benefits competition brings to the table for a high-volume program,” he adds.

In reference to a proposed upgrade of the existing engine, Gorenc argues, “Along with not creating competition, an upgrade to the existing engine simply can’t come close to the performance of an adaptive engine. Right now, an upgrade exists only as a proposal.”

Meanwhile, Gorenc says the tests of both companies’ engines indicate considerable progress in maturing the new architecture of these engines—real engines producing real results.

Looking specifically at GE’s progress since December 2020, he highlights testing of its XA100 adaptive cycle engine, which includes ground test campaigns on two separate engines from the company’s Evendale, Ohio, facility. That testing has demonstrated the Air Force’s performance goals, and GE has revealed that its engine will not only fit the Air Force’s F-35A, but also the carrier-based F-35C. GE’s engine began further testing at the Arnold Engineering Development Complex in late March. Pratt & Whitney’s XA101 adaptive cycle engine, meanwhile, fired up in September 2021 and reported “amazing” results.

General Electric’s XA100 adaptive cycle engine in its Evendale, Ohio, test cell. Photo courtesy of GE

“So, we have long-term solutions for F-35 propulsion in AETP engines that have already seen significant investment,” Gorenc says. “Congress, leaders in the Pentagon, and industry agree that something must be done about the engine. I want the engine that gives Air Force pilots an overwhelming advantage for decades, not just an incremental upgrade that we’ll have to revisit over and over again.”

The F-35 is expected to be around for another 40 years. With double the thermal management capability of today’s engine, AETP engines offer room for the F-35 of the future to expand its mission capability with next-gen systems. That’s not to mention the lifecycle fuel and CO2 savings the AETP engines would produce, with second order impacts on the Air Force’s tanker fleet.

With more than 2,400 of these advanced aircraft expected to roll off the line in total, introducing a more capable engine would follow the lead of several 4th generation fighters that received a new engine, including the F-16, F-15, and F-14. “This is a normal evolution of a high-volume program like the F-35,” Gorenc says.

He concludes: “There are lots of people who are invested in the long-term success of the F-35 program. Those people should be invested in a competition for a new adaptive cycle engine. It’s the only path that keeps the F-35 relevant decades into the future. We owe our Warfighters the very best equipment—and the time is now.”

Gen. Frank Gorenc is a consultant with GE Aviation, which paid to publish this this article.  

DOD’s Sexual Assault Prevention Improving—But Still Found Lacking—in Pair of New Reports

DOD’s Sexual Assault Prevention Improving—But Still Found Lacking—in Pair of New Reports

April 1, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III released the findings of a 20-base review of sexual assault prevention and response practices within days of a congressional report that found additional focus needed on prevention along with “continued congressional oversight.” 

The Government Accountability Office published its latest recommendations March 24 in the report, “Sexual Assault in the Military: Continued Congressional Oversight and Additional DOD Focus on Prevention Could Aid DOD’s Efforts.” 

Meanwhile, the Pentagon’s “2021 On-Site Installation Evaluation Report,” posted online March 31, represents a new way ahead for the department.

GAO’s Findings

The GAO acknowledged that “DOD has taken a number of steps to address sexual assault” but found areas where it was lacking, including that its activities focused largely on response rather than prevention. 

DOD could improve prevention by working on its prevention strategy, improving how it measures the effectiveness of prevention efforts, and doing long-term strategic planning, the GAO found. It said DOD could better protect male service members and civilian employees who are victims, finding that “DOD was not tracking all reported work-related sexual assaults involving civilian employees.” 

The watchdog measured how the department had complied with 249 sexual assault-related statutory requirements enacted by Congress from 2004 to 2019 as well as with 30 prior GAO recommendations, finding that “DOD has made progress in addressing some of the recommendations, but sustained leadership is needed to ensure that the remainder of these recommendations are addressed.” Of the 249 statutory requirements, 191 were still in force as of the enactment of the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act.

DOD’s Findings

In a March 30 memo by Austin that accompanied the Pentagon’s base-by-base report, he said he’d made “countering the scourge of sexual assault in the military a key priority” since taking office. 

The assessments undertaken for the 2021 On-Site Evaluation Report built on the findings of the Independent Review Commission on Sexual Assault in the Military. The commission called for “broad policy compliance checks, the assessment and development of prevention capabilities at each installation, … and site visits to a representative sample of military installations,” according to the memo.

The Pentagon report of installations said the DOD had made “steady progress in addressing sexual assault in the military” for a decade but still found “persistent challenges across areas of violence and climate throughout the force.”

Part of the report’s purpose was to hammer out a process for doing on-site evaluations in the future, and it recommends institutionalizing the process. Austin’s memo further sets forth that the evaluations should take place every two years.

Out of the 20 installations evaluated, four belong to the Department of the Air Force: Dyess Air Force Base, Texas; Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas; Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska; and Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif. The on-site evaluations took place from November 2021 to January 2022 to verify how the bases assessed their own compliance with DOD rules; and to judge how well positioned each installation was to prevent assaults.

Bases were selected after a force-wide command climate survey done in the first six months of 2021 that asked about risk factors for sexual assault and protective factors. Risk factors included alcohol impairing memory, binge drinking, stress, passive leadership, toxic leadership, racially harassing behaviors, sexually harassing behaviors, and workplace hostility. Protective factors included cohesion, connectedness, engagement and commitment, fairness, inclusion, morale, safe storage for lethal means, work-life balance, leadership support, and transformational leadership.

Of the 20, some were selected because of their high risk factors on the climate survey and some for their high protective factors. Likewise, units at each base were named “units of interest” because of either high risk or high protective factors. 

Evaluators then looked at four categories of “alignment and compliance”—victim assistance, reporting, program/policy, and training—at each base and identified both “strengths to leverage” and “areas for improvement.” 

Dyess Air Force Base, Texas: According to the climate survey, Dyess placed among the less risky bases in the evaluation and one of the most protective—and it was one of only two given a “prevention quality confidence” rating of “high.”  The 7th Operations Group there was deemed a “promising unit.” Areas for improvement included clarifying who is responsible for sexual assault prevention training and appointing an alternative sexual assault response coordinator.

Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, Alaska: The combined base of Airmen and Soldiers scored riskiest of the four DAF bases and least protective. Areas for improvement included instability in the Sexual Assault Prevention and Response program because of temporary hires working as coordinators in a high-traffic location that could make victims uncomfortable.

Laughlin Air Force Base, Texas: Laughlin came in fourth out of 20 for protection while while also rating seventh-riskiest. Areas for improvement included budgeting, which had been cut; the fact that prevention activities were rarely performed; and that victims meet “with defense prior to trial, which may further traumatize the victim.”

Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif.: Because so few bases belong to the USSF, Vandenberg was included so the service would have some representation. Its risk score was third-lowest of 20, and its protective score was third-highest. Areas for improvement: Sexual Assault Prevention and Response staff had little understanding of their role; needed another person on the staff; and had limited interaction with the base’s “Violence Prevention Integrator.”

Threat of Russian Chemical Weapons is ‘Wake-up Call’ on WMDs

Threat of Russian Chemical Weapons is ‘Wake-up Call’ on WMDs

April 1, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Concerns over weapons of mass destruction have surged in recent weeks, as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has turned increasingly brutal and officials warn that Russian President Vladimir Putin may use chemical, biological, or even nuclear weapons.

For the Defense Department’s counter-WMD leaders, it’s a pivotal moment—and potentially a “wake-up call” for the U.S. to realize the importance of the mission, they told a House Armed Services subcommittee on April 1.

“I think the crisis in Ukraine and the blatant threats, really, by Russia of the potential use of chemical and biological weapons is opening everyone’s eyes to how much of a problem this is,” John Plumb, assistant secretary of Defense for space policy, told the HASC Intelligence and Special Operations subpanel. 

For years, officials said, concerns over weapons of mass destruction were focused on their potential use by violent extremist organizations, like ISIS or al-Qaeda, or so-called “rogue states” like North Korea or Iran.

Recently, however, that has changed, as DOD has started to grapple with their potential use by adversaries with far greater capabilities—meaning a shift in priorities.

“From looking at closing the gaps that we have across the WMD spectrum in the investments, the main thing that we are pivoting from is concerns that it would be a non-state actor who would be using this to then really looking at state-based threats and the depth of the science and technology that they have available to them,” Deborah G. Rosenblum, assistant secretary of Defense for nuclear, chemical, and biological defense programs, told lawmakers. “And we can get into greater detail in terms of the specificity, but that is a dramatic pivot from a threat perspective.”

Russian officials have denied accusations that they have used chemical weapons, but independent observers have reported their use in Syria and Chechnya, as well as in poisonings in the United Kingdom. Now, Russia has accused Ukraine and the U.S. of developing biological and chemical weapons, an argument that Western leaders fear will be used as a pretext for Russia deploying such weapons of their own. 

“I can say to you, unequivocally, there are no offensive biological weapons in the Ukraine laboratories that the United States has been involved with,” Rosenblum said.

Still, deterring Russia from using any WMDs in Ukraine presents a “challenge” to the U.S., Plumb acknowledged.

“I think the fact that the White House has used the megaphone of the United States of America to call this out is an important deterrent,” Plumb said. “It’s not just the administration, it’s also working with the Congress too, to rally the entire NATO alliance to kind of align against this. … We have this communication conflict that we really need to work on. On a readiness side, there is some argument to be made that better readiness and better training … helps deter. It’s necessary but not sufficient. But the more ready we are to engage in a zone like that, then perhaps the higher the threshold is for its use.”

In order to be prepared should deterrence fail, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III has directed that DOD integrate counter-WMD operations into “planning, resourcing, modernizing, and then more importantly, training and exercising, holistically,” said Vice Adm. Collin Patrick Green, deputy commander of U.S. Special Operations Command.

In 2018, SOCOM took over the lead role in organizing C-WMD efforts across the department. Now, four years later, Green sees the current crisis as a critical moment for the entire department and all of government to realize the urgency of the mission, just as they did after the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001.

“I think this is a wake-up call with regard to C-WMD, much like [counterterrorism] was,” Green said. “So I think the coordinating authority and the work that we’ve done here with my colleagues to recognize this threat, to plan for it, to modernize, and then to train and exercise, frankly, it’s a holistic approach.”

Kurilla Takes Command of CENTCOM, Says It ‘Must Maintain the Requisite Resources’

Kurilla Takes Command of CENTCOM, Says It ‘Must Maintain the Requisite Resources’

April 1, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

Army Gen. Michael “Erik” Kurilla took command of U.S. Central Command on April 1, formally succeeding Marine Corps Gen. Kenneth F. McKenzie Jr. in a ceremony in Tampa, Fla.

Kurilla’s ascension to the head of CENTCOM comes at a potentially key moment for the combatant command. The Pentagon has increasingly emphasized competition with China as the nation’s “pacing challenge,” and the invasion of Ukraine has brought renewed focus to Europe and the “acute threat” Russia presents. After more than 20 years of war in Afghanistan, the U.S. has left, reducing its presence in the region.

Despite all this, Kurilla argued in the first few moments after taking command, the U.S. “must remain fiercely and actively engaged in the 21 countries of Central Command.”

“Our adversaries are watching closely for any sign that America’s commitment to the collective security of the region is wavering,” Kurilla warned. “Our adversaries are poised to capitalize on any opportunities that emerge. We must not grant them any.”

Kurilla also made the case for the Defense Department to continue investing in the region, pointing to both its strategic importance and future threats.

“We must ensure a favorable balance of power in the region. CENTCOM must maintain the requisite resources to find, fix, and finish threats to the homeland before those threats develop the capability to conduct external operations; to secure maritime straits and global trade routes; to ensure the free flow of commerce through the region,” Kurilla said.

Kurilla’s comments echoed those made by Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, who spoke at the ceremony and addressed the service members serving in CENTCOM directly.

“This region is where we protect waterways so that global commerce can flow. It’s where we fight terrorists who threaten our citizens. And it’s where we work with our partners to confront instability from Iran and its proxies,” Lloyd said. “CENTCOM is central to our security. It’s central to our readiness. And it’s central to our mission.”

In the short term, Austin said, CENTCOM will continue to focus on intelligence sharing and regional air defense, a nod to the recent airstrikes by Iranian-backed militias on American allies such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates—in some cases, the strikes have even targeted bases with U.S. personnel.

In his confirmation hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Kurilla, who previously served as chief of staff of CENTCOM, stressed the importance of both human and artificial intelligence in countering Iran.

In the longer term, Austin said, “we’ll work together to tackle Iran’s use of missiles and its proliferation of unmanned aerial systems. And we’ll keep standing strong with our partners to hold Iran and its proxies accountable.”

The threat from Iran was consistently cited by Kurilla’s predecessor, McKenzie, as the primary concern for CENTCOM. But the course of his three-year tenure was marked by several other key moments—in particular, Austin highlighted Israel’s transition to the area of responsibility, the transition to an advise-and-assist role in Iraq, and the non-combatant evacuation out of Afghanistan that rescued more than 124,000 people but resulted in the deaths of 13 service members in a suicide bombing.

Austin, McKenzie, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark A. Milley all made reference to the Afghanistan airlift and the lives lost in their remarks.

“Since I assumed command in March of 2019, CENTCOM has suffered 43 killed and 468 wounded in action,” McKenzie said. “Every one of these lives altered or lost in the line of duty has profoundly affected me, and how could they not? Again, there’s a very steep price associated with the task that we set before ourselves here.”

Still, McKenzie called serving as the commander of CENTCOM the “greatest honor of my career,” and noted that the mission in Afghanistan achieved its core objective.

“It’s worth remembering that we went to Afghanistan to prevent another terrorist attack on our homeland. And we’ve done so. That there has not been another 9/11 in the 21 years since is no accident,” McKenzie said. “It’s a testament to the perseverance and devotion of the men and women of CENTCOM, as well as to the perseverance and devotion of our allies and partners that have served with us in that country.”

Milley, for his part, credited McKenize for guiding CENTCOM, “and by extension the nation, through some of our most tough times.”

“These last few years have been quite intense,” said Milley. “Frank and I have talked a lot—almost daily, and on many occasions, multiple times a day. Countless phone calls, meetings, VTCs, and endless discussions. Very emotional, very strategic, very heartfelt. I have personally an incredible amount of trust, confidence, and personal respect for Frank McKenzie.”

In 2005, as a lieutenant colonel, Kurilla was wounded in Iraq during a firefight, getting shot three times and suffering a shattered femur, Milley said.

“He recovered fast enough to pass the 75th Ranger Regiment assessment and continue jumping out of airplanes,” Milley added. “You can knock Erik Kurilla down, but you can’t keep him down.”

Most recently, Kurilla served as commander of the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C., which deployed thousands of Soldiers to Afghanistan as part of the evacuation process. 

“If there ever was some way to feed into a machine the requirements for the perfect leader of CENTCOM—the character traits, the attributes, the experiences, the knowledge, and the personality that will be ideal—that machine would spit out Erik Kurilla,” Milley said.