Congress Wants AETP Engines to be Installed in All F-35As Starting in 2027

Dec. 8, 2021 | By John A. Tirpak

Congress wants new engines in the current and future F-35 fleet, with installs starting in 2027, according to language in the conference version of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act. It wants a joint plan for doing so from the Secretary of the Air Force and the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment within two weeks of the delivery of the fiscal 2023 budget request to Congress.

It also wants a plan on the future of propulsion for the F-35B and C-models—also to be installed starting in 2027—but left open whether the new engines for those aircraft will be AETP derivatives or Pratt & Whitney’s proposed enhanced F135.

The mandate plan, which is included in the compromise version of the fiscal 2022 defense policy bill, requires a “competitive acquisition strategy, informed by fiscal considerations” from the Air Force on how it will equip all F-35As—including those already in service—with the new AETP powerplants. Congress wants a schedule “annotating pertinent milestones and yearly fiscal resource requirements for the implementation of such a strategy.”

Lt. Gen. Eric T. Fick, the Joint Program Office director of the F-35, has said that if the Air Force is to put an AETP engine in its F-35As, it would bear the cost of development and production alone, as other users of the jet with the F-35B and C variants could not directly use such a powerplant.

General Electric and Pratt & Whitney are in the midst of testing their XA-100 and XA-101 prototypes, respectively, which were developed under the AETP. The new engines provide substantial increases in performance, with a 30 percent increase in range or 40 percent boost in persistence, made possible by a 25 percent reduction in fuel burn. Both engines would also provide double-digit improvements in acceleration.

The enhancements would extend the range of F-35s and reduce their dependence on tankers, particularly in or near contested airspace.

Both companies said they could meet Congress’ previously expressed interest in starting an AETP retrofit on the F-35 circa 2027, although officials from both companies described that timetable as ambitious.

What About Navy, Marine Corps F-35s?

The compromise National Defense Authorization Act mandates a similar report from the Secretary of the Navy, “on how it will integrate a new propulsion system in the F-35B and C models. Both GE and Pratt have said that the F-35B’s downward-rotating rear nozzle makes the AETP engines incompatible with that aircraft, due to its third-stream air bypass system. However, Fick has said that all variants of the F-35 will need an improved propulsion system to take full advantage of the F-35 Block 4 capability upgrades now in development. While the Navy could potentially use an AETP with heavy modification—either the engine or the C-model’s carrier arrestor hook would have to be reconfigured—the most likely solution would be the Enhanced Engine Package (EEP), which Pratt has proposed for its own F135 engine that now powers the whole F-35 fleet.

The NDAA says that the “advanced propulsion system” that congress wants in the F-35B and C models “means a derivative” of the AETP or “a derivative of a propulsion system previously developed for the F-35 aircraft.”

As part of the report from the Navy, Congress wants to know how much a new engine would improve the “combat effectiveness and sustainment costs” of the F-35B and C, “including any effects resulting from A) increased thrust, fuel efficiency, thermal capacity, and electrical generation, and B) improvements in acceleration, speed, range, and overall mission effectiveness.”

The Navy report is also to provide an assessment of how an advanced propulsion system could reduce aerial tanking requirements, and any “overall cost benefit” from “reduced acquisition and sustainment.”

Like the Air Force, the Navy is to provide a competitive acquisition strategy, as well as “consideration of technical limitations” of such an enterprise.

Congress did not specify whether the competitive acquisition strategies to be evaluated include a winner-take-all approach, or whether it will consider annual competitive buys, as was done during the “Great Engine War” of the 1980s. Under that approach GE and Pratt competed for the lion’s share of engine production for the F-15 and F-16 in any given year, with the “loser” receiving at least some work. The benefit was constant competition and product improvement, with the byproduct of maintaining two companies capable of fighter engine production for wartime surge capacity.

GE designed the F136 engine for the F-35, as the Pentagon planned to conduct a similar annual engine competition, but former Defense Secretary Robert Gates shut down the competition, saying it was unnecessary and wasteful.

The JPO estimates that more than 5,000 F-35s may be produced, including U.S., partner, and foreign military sales customers.

US Needs ‘Resilient, Robust’ Space Highway, Space Force General Says

Dec. 8, 2021 | By Greg Hadley

Within the next five to 10 years, Space Force Brig. Gen. John M. Olson envisions far more than just one mission from NASA to return humanity to the moon—he anticipates a “vibrant commercial focus” led by rapidly expanding space companies.

A key component of that will be a “resilient, robust hybrid space architecture, one which has a vision that is well off to the moon and perhaps beyond,” Olson, the mobilization assistant to the Chief of Space Operations, said at Defense One’s virtual Outlook 2022 forum Dec. 8.

That architecture, sometimes referred to as a space “highway,” will have to be a collective effort, Olson said, between private industry, civil agencies, and the military. But given that the Space Force is responsible for space domain awareness, it will have to play a particularly crucial role.

“This is right around the corner,” Olson said. “This is an important area that we look at, one in which we’re following the lead of NASA and we’re actually bolstering strong collaborative partnership with NASA, with industry, with our partners and allies, and like-minded nations around the globe.”

Just how this architecture will be structured and built out is “the grand strategy question, or opportunity, I would rather say, for our time,” Olson said. But there was one point on which he insisted—China cannot be allowed to reach the Moon and build up its own architecture before the U.S.

“As we look at this global competition for resources, for opportunities, for exploration, and for the benefits that can leverage so much goodness here on the face of the Earth, I think the United States must be first,” Olson said, pointing to aggressive actions taken by the Chinese on Earth as evidence that they will look to impose their will wherever possible.

At the moment, there are no Space Force Guardians actually in outer space. But Lt. Gen. Stephen N. Whiting, head of Space Operations Command, said in July that he would not be surprised if there are space-faring Guardians in the near future. And Olson’s vision of the space architecture of the near future is similarly far-reaching and transformative.

“The … federal highway systems, which are actually known by the Eisenhower federal highway and defense systems, just like that enabled transportation and the ability to safeguard our nation, the ability to stimulate commerce and business across the United States, as did the electrical grid, and the transcontinental railroad, and the internet—all these great examples of infrastructure underlie this huge opportunity that we have now as we look at space,” Olson said.

The role of the government, and more specifically the Space Force, in all of this is to ensure space domain awareness and to “set the standard for interoperability and set the guidelines and the rules of the road,” Olson said.

The issue of domain awareness and safety has become increasingly relevant after Russia conducted an anti-satellite missile test Nov. 15 that created a cloud of hundreds of pieces of debris.

Rattling off statistics from previous satellite tests by other nations that created smaller debris fields lower in orbit, Olson criticized the Russian test as reckless and “absolutely gross in its impact.” Such tests, he added, highlight the need for the Space Force and the awareness it provides for NASA and industry.

“The Space Force focus is on resilience, because we now know that we have a contested environment. As you just saw on the 15th of November, our competitors around the globe have had a series of irresponsible acts in space,” said Olson. “And as much as we do not like that, we also feel that that’s a pragmatic reality that we’re going to have to know and deal with.”

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.”