Biden Says Troops ‘Not On The Table’ to Shore up NATO Eastern Flank, Deter Russia from Invading Ukraine

Dec. 8, 2021 | By Abraham Mahshie

President Joe Biden said unequivocally Dec. 8 that no U.S. troops would be used to deter Russia from invading Ukraine, and administration and DOD officials said there are no plans for additional defense assistance after a final small arms delivery this week.

In the aftermath of a tense videoconference between Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin Dec. 7, the White House has sought to de-escalate tensions with Russia and lend credence to a diplomatic solution to the crisis at the Ukrainian border, where Russia maintains more than 100,000 troops. In recent weeks, Russia has consolidated forces on multiple fronts to the north and east of Kyiv and wields a sizable Black Sea fleet to Ukraine’s south.

“That is not on the table,” Biden told reporters on the south lawn of the White House when asked if U.S. troops could be used in or around Ukraine to deter a Russian invasion. “The idea the United States is going to unilaterally use force to confront Russia from invading Ukraine is not in the cards right now.”

Rather, Biden described the warning he gave Putin the day before: “If, in fact, he invades Ukraine, there will be severe consequences—severe consequences—and economic consequences like none he’s ever seen.”

He said he told Putin, “We would probably also be required to reinforce our presence in NATO countries to reassure particularly those on the eastern front.” But for now, a diplomatic team will start working with Russia to address security concerns, Biden added.

His words. and the “if” condition, were echoed by national security advisor Jake Sullivan Dec. 8 in an interview with Defense One.

“What it means to be proactive is to set the table,” Sullivan said of preparing Ukraine for a defensive contingency. “We have gone above and beyond what any administration has done in terms of providing the kinds of defensive support to the Ukrainian military.”

The United States has given Ukraine more than $2.5 billion in defense assistance since Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014, and $400 million in defense assistance this year. The last lethal and non-lethal articles of a $60 million package authorized by Biden during Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s Washington visit in August will arrive this week.

Those articles include small munitions, such as machine guns and grenades, and medical assistance, not the new air and naval defenses the Ukrainian defense minister said during a visit to Washington in November were necessary to deter Russia.

Still, Sullivan said work has been done to deter Russia and shore up NATO’s eastern flank allies, some of whom formally were under direct control or influence of the Soviet Union.

“We have engaged in a substantial amount of effort, both in terms of the operations and exercises we’ve undertaken this year,” Sullivan said of U.S. operations in the NATO eastern flank countries, which include Poland, the Baltic nations, and Black Sea allies Romania and Bulgaria.

“From our perspective, we have allied unity, we are providing support to the Ukrainians, we have sent a clear message to the Russians, and we believe that this shows the kind of proactive, strong, clear, decisive policy that puts us in the best position to manage this crisis as we go forward,” Sullivan added.

Also speaking to Defense One Dec. 8, Pentagon policy chief Colin H. Kahl left the door open for Biden to provide additional defense assistance to Ukraine.

“There are options to expand security assistance to assist in Ukraine’s self defense, but I don’t want to get ahead of the President’s decisions based on that,” Kahl said. “We’ve been in lockstep in terms of consultations with our allies sharing intelligence, we all see the same thing.”

Reassuring NATO Allies

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Mark A. Milley held a call with NATO chiefs of defense earlier in the week and met personally with his Polish counterpart at the Pentagon Dec. 8. The meeting follows a call between Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and his Polish counterpart Nov. 30, which discussed how to enhance deterrence on the NATO border.

Nonetheless, Pentagon spokesman John F. Kirby said in a Dec. 8 Pentagon briefing that there were no plans for Austin to hold additional consultations with his NATO counterparts, and no new defense assistance to Ukraine to announce.

“If there is a further incursion and invasion into Ukraine, and if our NATO allies request additional capabilities to assist them with their own defensive needs or requirements, then we would positively look at those requests,” he said, referring to Sullivan’s remarks at the White House Dec. 7. “We’re just not there yet.”

Several administration officials qualified that if Russia were to “further invade” Ukraine, a response would be triggered.

Kirby clarified to Air Force Magazine that could mean Russia sending reinforcements into the breakaway republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in southeastern Ukraine. The sliver of Ukraine has been cut off from the rest of the country by a frontline and low-intensity conflict with Russian-backed separatists since the Minsk agreement was signed in 2014.

“It means additional incursions into Ukraine, violating their territorial integrity and their sovereignty with additional units inside Ukraine,” Kirby said.

As the crisis evolves, American Soldiers and special operators are currently on Ukrainian soil.

The Defense Department confirmed that approximately 150 trainers from the Florida National Guard’s 53rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team and an undisclosed number of U.S. special operations forces are working with the Ukrainian military.

The U.S. Air Force began basing MQ-9 Reapers at Romanian Air Force Base 71 at Campia Turzii earlier this year. U.S. Air Forces in Europe boss Gen. Jeffrey L. Harrigian said at the time, “The forward and ready positioning of our MQ-9s at this key strategic location reassures our allies and partners, while also sending a message to our adversaries that we can quickly respond to any emergent threat.” Theater security packages of USAF fighters rotate to the base regularly. USAF also has a detachment of contractor-owned and operated MQ-9s in Poland, as well as an aviation detachment in Poland, that supports rotations of USAF cargo and fighter jets to the country.

Nearby, the Army’s 4th Security Force Assistance Brigade has rotational teams located in Georgia, Latvia, North Macedonia, Poland, and Romania, and the 164th Air Defense Artillery Brigade headquarters, Florida Army National Guard, is currently in Ansbach, Germany.

DOD declined to disclose timelines for additional training, operations, or deployments in the region.

Vice Chair Nominee Pushes Nuclear Modernization to Deal with China, Russia in Confirmation Hearing

Dec. 8, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Adm. Christopher W. Grady, nominee to be vice chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told Senators during his Dec. 8 confirmation hearing that the Pentagon needs to be prepared to deal with “two nuclear peer competitors,” calling China’s rapid growth of its nuclear capabilities “spectacular” and Russia’s recent actions at the Ukrainian border “very destabilizing.”

Grady, picked to succeed the now-retired USAF Gen. John E. Hyten as the military’s No. 2 officer, pointed to the U.S.’s own nuclear modernization efforts as crucial to that preparation, agreeing “absolutely” with Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) that a modernized nuclear triad is necessary.

“We need to have that responsive, flexible, and survivable triad across the three legs if we’re going to meet the challenges of two nuclear peer competitors,” Grady said.

China has garnered much of the headlines lately for its buildup of its nuclear arsenal, including hundreds of new missile silos and a test of a hypersonic orbital bombardment system. And Grady agreed with a recent assessment by U.S. Strategic Command boss Adm. Charles “Chas” A. Richard that China’s growth in the area has been a “strategic breakout” and “breathtaking.”

“I think that China’s breakout, as Adm. Richard has called it, is indeed spectacular and indeed breathtaking,” Grady said. “And so therefore, we need to be postured to address that issue. We need to think about how we would proceed with deterrence, particularly deterrence now against two peer competitors, who need to be deterred in two different ways. And deterrence, then I think, builds on that strong nuclear triad. … And so the modernization of the nuclear triad will be the underpinning of that deterrence effort against two nuclear competitors.”

Grady discussed efforts to replace the sea- and land-based legs of the triad, saying the “Ohio” class of submarines in the Navy are reaching a tipping point when it comes to their hull strength, and the Minuteman III ICBM system is becoming more expensive to maintain than its proposed replacement, the Ground-based Strategic Deterrent.

“I do believe that, as we think about GBSD and the timeline there, at a certain point, it costs more to maintain than it does to re-modernize, and we’re approaching that,” Grady said.

But it is not just the weapon systems that need to be updated, Grady said. Agreeing with a question from Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who pointed to nuclear command, control, and communications as another area that needs to be updated and secured.

“What we see in the cyber domain across all of our weapon systems has to be addressed. And so we talk a lot about being able to defend our networks—the ultimate network to defend is the NC3 network and we’re going to have to be able to do that in cyber,” Grady said. “So if confirmed, it would be a high priority of mine to continue the momentum started to do that.”

The challenges presented by two near-peer competitors have become increasingly clear recently. Russia continues to mass troops near the Ukrainian border and fears of a potential invasion rise, as China continues to send planes into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone, raising tensions there.

Balancing those two threats, particularly with the Pentagon’s force planning construct, will form a key part of Grady’s responsibilities if he is confirmed.

“If you start with Russia in Crimea and with Ukraine, it is a very dangerous and destabilizing situation that we’re working our way through,” said Grady. “It’s important for us to ensure that we work with our NATO partners and continue to recognize the the challenges that are faced by Russian activity in that area of the world, and then remain rock solid in our commitment to Ukrainian sovereignty. …

“I think in the western Pacific, the challenges are equally important, as we have discussed, that’s the pacing threat in the Pacific, the INDOPACOM. And we’re going to have to meet those on a daily basis. Again, two near-peer competitors, we’re going to have to balance those going forward.”

Grady’s path toward confirmation appears relatively smooth; Multiple Senators, both Republican and Democrat, expressed optimism Dec. 8 about advancing his nomination to ensure the vice chair position is filled as quickly as possible.

Air Force Demos Reaper Operations in Pacific Flights with Non-Expert Troops, Limited Gear

Dec. 7, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force demonstrated that it can operate the remotely-piloted MQ-9 Reaper over long-range flights in the Pacific using limited ground support gear and non-specialist ground personnel. The demonstration provided a boost for the service’s agile combat employment concept, it said Dec. 7.

The tests and exercises, called “ACE REAPER,” were conducted mid-September to early October, but the Air Force is announcing them only now.

The 556th Test and Evaluation Squadron flew an MQ-9 from Creech Air Force Base, Nev., to Marine Corps Base Hawaii using a “significantly modified Auto Takeoff and Landing Capability,” the unit said. The new system uses “imagery alone, without any standard surveys conducted prior” to field operations. While at the Marine Corps base, the MQ-9 flew five local pattern sorties and was used in training six sets of ground crews not previously trained in Reaper ground operations, certifying those crews to train other non-specialists in MQ-9 operations for future sorties.

The agile combat employment team “conducted three rapid refuels utilizing only five multi-capable airmen who were proficient between weapons, aircraft maintenance, and communications,” 556th commander Lt. Col. Michael Chmielewski said in a press release. Although refueling, rearming, and regenerating a Reaper typically takes three hours, the commander reported an average time of just 20 minutes.

The MQ-9 then flew on to Andersen Air Force Base, Guam. The flight validated its ability to make the transit “on reduced satellite bandwidth” and migrating from one satellite to another.

The 556th proved the MQ-9 “does not require any … equipment” to conduct launch and recovery operations, Chmielewski said.

A pilot on the ground at Andersen used a Ruggedized Aircraft Maintenance Test Station as an ersatz cockpit to control the MQ-9 to a landing once it was within line of sight. As at Marine Corps Base Hawaii, “this landing was conducted without any MQ-9 operations or runway surveys being physically conducted prior to first landing at Guam,” the 556th said in a press release.

The entire logistics footprint included seven personnel and a half-pallet of equipment, while a generator, light cart, and fuel were already in place, Chmielewski said. Another sortie was generated within seven hours of the equipment arriving to Guam.

Collectively, the experiment showed that MQ-9 operations could be conducted with “a nearly 90 percent reduction in maintenance manpower, 95 percent reduction in maintenance equipment, and a 100 percent reduction in launch and recovery equipment,” he added.

The experiments verified aspects of USAF’s hub-and-spoke concept for island operations in the Pacific, conducting minor maintenance, rapid refueling, and rapid re-arming at austere locations. “This capability will move its logistics team out from other large footprints and remain closer to the fight to maximize its combat effectiveness,” the 556th said.

“From maintenance to communications to operations, our team did a phenomenal job across the spectrum to innovate new tactics from existing capabilities on a near-impossible timeline … to start validating the MQ-9’s ability to be agile,” said Chmielewski. He acknowledged the support of the 432nd Wing and 49th Wing in the tests.

The next step will be employing the MQ-9 in its new lean format into the Valiant Shield 2022 exercise to “increase strategic and operational success in the theater,” he said.

Nearly 70 Percent of Receivers Now Cleared to Get Fuel From KC-46

Dec. 7, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

The Air Force has cleared the KC-46 Pegasus tanker to aerially refuel five more types of aircraft, giving it capability with “nearly 70 percent” of all aircraft that request air tanking, Air Mobility Command announced.

The new aircraft certified for the KC-46 include the AC-130J Ghostrider, KC-130J Combat King, MC-130 Commando II, C-5M Super Galaxy, and E-3G Sentry. “In addition, we are putting the Pegasus against our highest priority missions, such as direct Presidential support,” said Lt. Col. Kevin White, AMC’s deputy chief of the Aircraft and Logistics Requirements Division and the KC-46 cross-functional team lead.

The announcement marks the fourth “interim capability release” for the KC-46 since July, when it was cleared to refuel aircraft using its centerline drogue system. Since then, three groups of aircraft have been added, using the boom-type refueling system. These include the B-52, C-17, other KC-46As in August; and the F-15 and F-16 in October. The interim capability releases are not proceeding according to a preset schedule but rather as “incremental confidence measures,” AMC said. These “allow the AMC commander and other senior leaders to qualitatively and quantitatively assess achievements,” the command said.

The ICR plan “allows the Pegasus to conduct operational taskings that would otherwise be filled by the KC-135 Stratotanker and KC-10 Extender, increasing the force’s air refueling capacity and further seasoning total force Pegasus aircrews,” AMC said.

The KC-46 is operating under restrictions due to deficiencies in its Remote Vision System, which allows the boom operator, located just behind the cockpit, to remotely refuel aircraft at the back of the aircraft. Both the KC-135 and KC-10 allowed direct viewing through windows. The Air Force and Boeing are working to integrate an upgraded RVS that eliminates problems with lighting under certain conditions.

Despite these and other deficiencies, “the KC-46A continues to demonstrate its growing operational capabilities,” AMC said. “Crews will continue to fly training, exercise and demonstration missions until all operational confidence measures are met.”

The Air Force has said the KC-46A can be pressed into service for all types of receiver aircraft in a wartime crisis.

AMC reported that the Pegasus has completed over 6,000 missions, offloading over 37.8 million pounds of fuel and making 28,000 boom and 1,900 drogue contacts since January 2019.

The Air Force plans to acquire 179 KC-46s under the KC-X program, meant to replace most KC-135s and all KC-10s. It is to be followed by the “KC-Y” program, which has recently been called the “bridge” tanker, which will be another conventional aircraft that will replace the balance of the KC-135 fleet, beginning around 2028. The Air Force has said the “KC-Z” program may pursue a smaller, low-observable aircraft to refuel USAF airplanes in or near contested airspace.

Boeing is the prime contractor on the KC-46A program and to date has incurred losses of about $5 billion on the fixed-price program.

Fifty KC-46As are in the Air Force’s inventory following the delivery to Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J., of two aircraft in November. Other operational KC-46A bases include McConnell Air Force Base, Kan.; Seymour-Johnson Air Force Base, N.C.; Pease Air National Guard Base, N.H.; and Altus Air Force Base, Okla.

House, Senate Panels Unveil Compromise 2022 NDAA

Dec. 7, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Editor’s note: The House of Representatives passed the compromise 2022 National Defense Authorization Act the night of Dec. 7 by a vote of 363 to 70.

Leaders from the House and Senate Armed Services committees unveiled a revised 2022 National Defense Authorization Act on Dec. 7 in a bid to overcome gridlock and ensure the passage of the annual policy bill.

The new bill combines elements of a version passed by the full House and a version agreed to in the Senate Armed Services Committee, both in September. The 2022 NDAA also incorporates some of the hundreds of amendments proposed by senators after the SASC reported the bill to the full chamber.

The new bill authorizes $768 billion in spending, $740.3 billion for the Defense Department in line with the House and the SASC-approved draft and above the $715 billion defense budget requested by President Joe Biden.

The compromise bill includes a significant overhaul of the Uniform Code of Military Justice to remove the decision to prosecute certain crimes from the chain of command. One provision that was left out in the new draft would have required women to register for the draft.

For the Air Force, the new bill funds the service’s request to procure 48 new F-35s and adds five F-15EXs to an initial request for 12. It also prohibits USAF from retiring any A-10s while allowing the service to retire certain C-130s, KC-10s, and KC-135s.

In recent weeks, the Senate has struggled to pass its version of the 2022 NDAA quickly, with a majority of Senators voting against ending debate. Some lawmakers accused Majority Leader Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) of trying to jam the bill through without enough time for consideration and amendment votes. Schumer had sparked bipartisan criticism by waiting weeks to bring the bill to the main Senate floor.

Those delays, combined with a conference between the Senate and House to resolve the differences between the two versions of the bill, would likely have pushed NDAA passage into 2022. Instead, the version made public Dec. 7 resolved differences outside of the conference process with the goal of passing the bill before Jan. 1, a Senate aide told Air Force Magazine.

The chairs and ranking members of the House and Senate Armed Services committees, Reps. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) and Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) along with Sens. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) and Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) oversaw the negotiations that led to the new bill.

“We are pleased to announce we’ve come to a bipartisan, bicameral agreement on this year’s National Defense Authorization Act. This year’s agreement continues the Armed Services Committees’ 61-year tradition of working together to support our troops and strengthen national security. We urge Congress to pass the NDAA quickly and the President to sign it when it reaches his desk,” the group of four said in a press release.

Within a few hours of the bill’s unveiling, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced in a “Dear Colleague” letter that the House will vote on the new NDAA the same night.

How quickly the compromise NDAA bill will advance in the Senate remains to be seen. Schumer is still pushing hard for the Senate to pass President Joe Biden’s signature spending bill, the Build Back Better Act, by Christmas. At the same time, lawmakers are still working to raise the debt limit and avoid a default, with an estimated deadline of Dec. 15. The legislative calendar tentatively calls for both chambers to recess starting Dec. 11.

Congressional leaders frequently point to the six decades of NDAA passage, but there have been instances of the bill not being enacted until a new calendar year. Most recently, the Senate voted to override a presidential veto on the fiscal 2021 bill on Jan. 1, 2021. The fiscal 2013, 2011, 2008, and 2006 bills were all enacted after the new year as well.

Pentagon leaders have raised additional concerns in recent days about the use of continuing resolutions to fund the government.

While NDAAs set policy and authorize funds, they do not appropriate the money the Defense Department spends. Continuing resolutions keep the government open, but at the previous year’s spending levels. The current CR runs through mid-February, and some have suggested a full yearlong CR is possible, prompting Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III to issue a statement Dec. 6 saying such a move would cause “enormous, if not irreparable, damage” to national defense priorities.

Afghanistan, Politics Lead to Decline in Public Trust of Military

Dec. 7, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Americans’ trust and confidence in the U.S. military has declined precipitously in 2021, according to the results of a survey. Experts lay the blame on increasing political polarization and the fallout from this summer’s turbulent withdrawal from Afghanistan.

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute’s National Defense Survey released Dec. 1 found that just 45 percent of those polled said they had “a great deal of trust and confidence” in the military as an institution. That marks a 25-point drop from November 2018 and an 11-point drop since February 2021.

Just three years ago, 70 percent of those surveyed said they had a great deal of confidence.

The overall trend over the past few editions of the survey has been downward, going from 70 percent in 2018 to 63 percent in 2019 to 54 percent in February 2021. But the most recent drop is the biggest, recorded just two months after many Americans were shocked by reports from Afghanistan that included video of civilians breaching the airfield at Hamid Karzai International Airport, desperate to flee the Taliban and clinging to the side of Air Force aircraft.

“You can’t underestimate the searing images from the Afghanistan withdrawal and [their effect on] people’s trust in the institution,” retired Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari, now a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told Air Force Magazine. “So I think that had a very large, large effect. And so I think that the second thing will be, OK, does time kind of dim that image, or is this kind of a new normal for the military?”

Retired Marine Col. Mark F. Cancian, now a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ International Security Program, said he thinks reversing the fallout from the Afghanistan withdrawal, absent any other damaging incidents, will take a year.

“There could even be events where the military has an opportunity to shine—some foreign operation, maybe it could be humanitarian assistance or something,” Cancian said.

But it’s not the end of the Afghanistan War alone that contributed to lower public trust, experts said. For years now, pollsters and academics have noted declining public trust in institutions. The military has mostly been spared, actually building up trust after the Vietnam War and turning itself into one of the most trusted institutions in America. The creep of partisan politics, however, has become increasingly difficult to avoid.

The Reagan Defense Survey found that Republicans, Democrats, and independents all reported lower levels of confidence in the military. Republicans reported the biggest decline among those saying they have a great deal of confidence—a 17 percent drop from February and a 34 percent drop from 2018. By comparison, Democrats recorded drops of six and 17 percentage points, respectively, while independents had drops of nine and 28 points.

Republicans’ declining trust coincides with Republican lawmakers increasing criticism of military leaders for focusing on issues such as diversity, equity, and inclusion, as well as extremism in the ranks.

“If there’s continuing loss of trust in institutions, it is almost inevitable that the military gets dragged into that a little bit, because it is a factor with political polarization,” said Nathalie Grogan, a researcher with the Center for a New American Security. “And that is, to my view, the biggest problem with the declining trust, is that the military is being seen as a political institution. And that’s demonstrated with the very significant drop in trust in the military among political conservatives.”

The military has politicized itself in very few instances, Grogan said. Instead, civilian leaders and politicians have increasingly politicized the military. The result, she warned, is “increasing polarization and partisanship if civilian elected officials don’t make an effort to exclude the military—which they have not made that effort. They’ve been including the military in their partisan squabbles.”

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III, speaking in a taped interview with Defense One streamed online Dec. 7, also pointed to increasing partisanship as a cause for concern.

“The military doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and as you take a look at the landscape around the country, things have become a lot more partisan in recent years,” Austin said. “And if you look at what’s going on on various websites, that really adds fuel to some of that partisanship, but I think it’s very, very important that our military remain apolitical.”

Ferrari theorized that over roughly two decades of war, the public’s perception of the military allowed it to defy the trends of increasing polarization and decreased trust. With the war over, though, the military is now experiencing many of the same factors driving down trust in other institutions.

Potential Impact on Recruiting

While Ferrari and Grogan both noted that the armed services are starting from a much higher level of confidence when compared to others, the impact of these recent declines could be especially important when considering recruiting.

Recent surveys have shown today’s youth are less inclined to serve in the military. The Reagan National Defense Survey recorded declining trust among all groups, but the lowest levels were among those under 30 years old; more than 30 percent of the age group either said they had not much confidence at all or just a little confidence.

“If we see a downturn in recruiting because parents, influencers, no longer trust the institution, then we’re going to have a big problem, rapidly,” Ferrari said.

Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby, asked about the survey during a press briefing Dec. 6, added that recruiting isn’t the only issue.

“The men and women who serve in this department come from homes and families all over the country, and so the American public’s perceptions of the United States military matters to us, not just from a recruiting perspective, although that’s valid, but also from a representational perspective,” Kirby said.

In order to reverse these trends, Ferrari argued, military leaders should look to keep the armed services out of the headlines and not get drawn into partisan politics. In particular, Grogan said, the military should focus on the National Guard and how the Guard works with the public.

“That would be a very significant first step to rebuilding trust in the military, because the National Guard is the part of the armed forces that civilians will have the most contact with,” Grogan said. “Active-duty troops, with very few exceptions, are not interfacing with the public, but the National Guard often does, and it’s been incidents with the National Guard that have been politicized over the past couple years.”

If nothing else, Cancian said, the latest survey should serve as a reminder that public trust is earned.

“The military has no right to being the top-regarded institution in the United States—it is something it has earned over the course of my professional life,” Cancian said. “When I started my professional life as a young Marine lieutenant, the military was at the bottom, and it’s taken them literally half a century of work to get to the top.”

Austin Warns of Yearlong CR as China Invests Heavily in Military Technology

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Abraham Mahshie

Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III outlined Dec. 4 the vital importance of U.S. defense investment keeping pace with that of China before issuing a statement warning that such competition would suffer “irreparable” damage if Congress opts for a yearlong continuing resolution, a real possibility being discussed by lawmakers after a second short-term fix that funds the government until mid-February.

“Some have even suggested a CR could last an entire year,” Austin said in a statement released by the Pentagon on Dec. 6.

The Secretary warned that such a continuation of current fiscal year 2021 funding would be an “unprecedented move that would cause enormous, if not irreparable, damage for a wide range of bipartisan priorities—from defense readiness and modernization, to research and development, to public health.”

Austin highlighted how a yearlong CR would stymie innovation priorities in cyber, artificial intelligence, and hypersonics.

In keynote remarks at the Reagan National Defense Forum on Dec. 4, Austin said China was uninhibited in its own defense investments and pursuits.

“China is pouring state funds into key sectors,” he said. “The PLA is rapidly improving many of its capabilities, including strike, air, missile-defense, and anti-submarine measures. And it’s increasingly focused on integrating its information, cyber, and space operations.”

President Joe Biden’s proposed defense budget includes the largest-ever investment in research and development, some $112 billion for fiscal year 2022.

Austin said that includes work on stealthy and unmanned platforms as well as improved resiliency under sea, in space, and in cyberspace. Investments such as the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, slated for $5.1 billion, would invest in 100 military construction projects, some with partners and allies in the Indo-Pacific region to improve base access and ramp up joint exercises.

But no new investments will happen with a yearlong CR.

“Not being able to start those initiatives will definitely have an impact,” Pentagon Press Secretary John F. Kirby said during a Dec. 6 briefing in response to a question from Air Force Magazine.

Kirby referred to Austin’s comments at the Reagan forum in explaining how planned DOD investments are specifically targeted to counter “the kinds of threats that could emanate from places like Russia and China.”

“I understand the interest in hypersonics, but it goes beyond that,” he said. “When you can’t start new programs, when … you don’t have that money to spend on that sort of investment, it absolutely will affect your capabilities going forward.”

China’s Impact on the Evolving US Footprint in CENTCOM

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Amy Hudson

The recently completed Global Posture Review directed further analysis to determine the right force mix in the U.S. Central Command area of operations, but one thing is certain, the command’s director of operations said Dec. 6: The U.S. footprint won’t look like it has in the past.

Through its Belt and Road Initiative, China intends to grow its overseas military capabilities, expanding into Central Asia, Europe, the Middle East, the Persian Gulf region, and Africa, with the overall objective of “adjusting the global order,” said Maj. Gen. Alexus G. Grynkewich, U.S. Central Command director of operations, during an AFA Air and Space Warfighters in Action virtual event.

“China cannot achieve their objectives without going through the U.S. CENTCOM AOR,” Grynkewich said. “So, as we look at what our posture is in the Middle East, we need to recognize China as an aspiring global power—they’re not just a regional problem—and think about what a sufficient force level is in CENTCOM. Again, it’s going to be nothing like it was in years past, with a couple of ground wars at their heights a decade ago or so. But it certainly is not zero.”

China also gets about 50 percent of its hydrocarbons, the main component in petroleum and natural gas, from the Central Asia region. “That means something,” Grynkewich added. “It means that the central region is important to China. And if it’s important to China, it probably ought to be important to us, as well.”

Grynkewich did not offer specifics of what the classified Global Posture Review revealed, but he did say that in the short term to expect a reduced force presence, something that is already coming to fruition with the withdrawal from Afghanistan. There will also be a shift to a more dynamic operating concept.

The drawdown in Afghanistan resulted in a downsizing of U.S. forces in the region. Grynkewich noted that the two fighter squadrons previously based in Afghanistan are no longer in the command and that the U.S. tankers and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets that previously supported those operations have been repositioned.

In the future, he said, the U.S. is more likely to rotate forces into CENTCOM on an as-needed basis, depending on the situation on the ground. “In other words, rather than having a Carrier Strike Group in U.S. CENTCOM all the time, you’ll see a Carrier Strike Group come and go as the situation dictates,” he said.

Grynkewich said as the airpower and overall force posture changes, it’s “natural” to also re-evaluate the value of key operating locations such as Ali Al Salem, Kuwait; Al Dhafra Air Base, United Arab Emirates; al-Udeid Air Base, Qatar; and Prince Sultan Air Base, Saudi Arabia—all key launching pads for counterterrorism operations.

“It’s very meaningful to those nations that we have a presence there,” he said. “They view it as important to their own security that the Americans are there with them. And, so, it’s critical. That doesn’t mean that the installations are going to stay static. Certainly the number of Airmen at those locations, the number of Guardians, and others at those locations will change as our footprint changes.”

The 2020 ballistic missile attack on al-Asad Air Base, Iraq, also re-enforced the potential vulnerability of bases in the region to Iranian ballistic missiles and attacks by Iranian proxies.

“I think those nations are very aware of that,” Grynkewich said. “It’s not just a threat to our Airmen that are there, if you will. It’s a threat to the capital cities of many of those countries, and so they’re very keen to think about what it means to them … from a defensive perspective to have U.S. capabilities.”

At the same time, he noted, U.S. Central Command continues to think about the importance of building relationships with host nations, and operationally, what those host-nation agreements might mean for future contingency planning.

“We’re always going to be re-evaluating exactly what the footprint is, and do we have the bases where we want them to be,” he said. “I think given the importance that those bases have to the relationship, any decision to shutter a base or something like that would certainly be made at a higher level than U.S. Central Command, just because of the implications on the relationships that it would have.”

Space Force Focuses on Culture in ‘Intimate’ New Orientation Course

Dec. 6, 2021 | By Amanda Miller

The Space Force’s orientation course for people transferring into the new service—civilian and military alike—draws from the “welcoming and intimate” formats the Air Force’s major commands offer in their chiefs’ orientation courses for chief master sergeants.

Space Training and Readiness Command held the first Guardian Orientation Course the week of Nov. 15-19. The course is “expected to be offered to all current and future transferees within a year of their transfer” in hopes of “accelerating their contributions,” according to a news release.

The Space Force expects about 960 transfers from other military services or government agencies over the next year.

“Our competitors are increasing their activities, such as the recent Russian [anti-satellite] test, which was a significant event,” STARCOM commander Air Force Brig. Gen. Shawn N. Bratton said in the release. “Our job is to prepare you all for these actions and the doctrine to support it.”

STARCOM plans to offer the weeklong course 12 times a year at Peterson Space Force Base, Colo.’s National Security Space Institute, with up to three more at other sites, according to the release.

Peterson is STARCOM’s temporary home, referred to as “provisional,” pending a formal decision on where to base the headquarters. Space Force Chief of Space Operations Gen. John W. “Jay” Raymond led the command’s activation at a ceremony in August.

The weeklong Guardian Orientation Course provides “29 hours of instructor contact over a 40-hour period” to 50 students at a time, according to the release. It addresses the Space Force’s organizational structure and how the service relates to the Air Force and the Defense Department’s unified combatant commands. Students will tour USSF facilities and get briefed on a range of topics, such as history, culture, and promotions; and will receive introductions to the Space Force’s personnel strategy, The Guardian Ideal, and its Space Capstone Publication doctrine statement.

“This is the first time a branch will have been created with members from all armed services,” said Space Force Lt. Col. Ryan Durand, provost of the National Security Space Institute, in the release. “We have the unique opportunity to build and define what our culture will be.” The institute describes itself as the Space Force’s “focal point for space continuing education.”

In the lead-up to establishing the STARCOM field command—the organizational equivalent of an Air Force major command—Bratton told Air Force Magazine his vision for the orientation course was a “space-specific kind of acculturation training” to help promote a sense of belonging among interservice transferees coming from a mix of backgrounds. They’ll also receive job-specific training.