content.govdelivery.comcontent.govdelivery.com/.../99238/pa_morning_report_1… · web viewnote...

DO NOT FORWARD WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION FROM PRODUCT OWNER

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

BUDGETGov Exec: Sequestration specter already is making its mark on contractors (1)AF Times: States leaders look to cut fewer guardsmen (5)NUCLEAR ENTERPRISEGSN: U.S. Senator Presses Nuclear Agency on Lack of Future Funding Details (6)WIN TODAY’S FIGHTAP: U.S. to continue Afghan reconciliation talks (9)AP: Karzai: NATO should pull back to big bases (12)CARING FOR AIRMENNSTRMODERNIZATIONCourthouse News: Parts of Ellsworth AFB Off Superfund List (13)ACQUISITION EXCELLENCEReuters: U.S. seeks to ease concerns over F-35 delays, costs (14)GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTGSN: Deployed Russian Warheads Could Exceed 2,400, Experts Say (18)OF INTERESTFairbanks Miner: Eielson Air Force Base hit with EPA fine (19)National Defense: U.S. Wpn Manufacturers Feeling the Wrath of Arms-Control Activists (22)

BUDGET

1. Sequestration specter already is making its mark on contractors (Government Executive, 15 Mar 12) … Charles S. ClarkNeither the government nor the aerospace industry can afford to sit and wait for the sequestration required under budget law to kick in on Jan. 2, 2013, an industry chief said Wednesday. The mere threat of across-the-board spending cuts already has had a “chilling effect” on companies that are vital both to the economy and to U.S. national security, said Robert Stevens, chairman and chief executive officer of Lockheed Martin Corp.

2. Defense Budget: Some Clues Have Emerged, But More Uncertainty Ahead (National Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Lawrence P. Farrell Jr.The political season is upon us, and much of the rhetoric adds little visibility to the direction for defense. If one looks beyond the 2012 election, there are several political and budgetary hard points, some of which will drive and even trump strict defense budget considerations.

3. Obama's Shift-to-Asia Budget Is a Hollow Shell Game

of 50SAF/PAX | [email protected] | 703.571.3457 | 16 Mar 12

U.S. Air Force

Morning Report

Friday, 16 March 2012

(AOL Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Mackenzie EaglenIf you take the Administration's word for it, the most recent defense budget represents a sober-minded and far-thinking strategic shift from the Middle East to Asia, creating a smaller, high-tech force oriented increasingly towards inter-state conflict and deterrence. Many are even comparing the Pentagon's current vision with that of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who sought to transform the five-sided building away from Kosovo-style interventions and create an agile and sophisticated military oriented toward the Pacific.

4. Air Force to keep one airborne VIP capsule suite -- instead of 10 (Nextgov, 15 Mar 12) … Bob BrewinThe Air Force has said it will maintain only one controversial airborne VIP suite equipped with a couch and a 37-inch flat-screen TV -- instead of the 10 originally planned to transport high officials.

5. States leaders look to cut fewer guardsmen But plan calls for cutting more active airmen(Air Force Times, 15 Mar 12) … Brian EverstineState leaders are proposing dramatic changes to the Air Force’s proposed budget plan, reversing the movement of aircraft and cutting thousands more active duty airmen to save thousands of guardsmen.

CONTINUE TO STRENGTHEN THE NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE

6. U.S. Senator Presses Nuclear Agency on Lack of Future Funding Details (Global Security Newswire, 15 Mar 12) … Elaine M. GrossmanWASHINGTON -- A Senate panel chairman on Wednesday questioned why the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration has withheld future funding figures for key atomic complex programs in its fiscal 2013 budget request, contrary to a reporting requirement in law.

PARTNER WITH JOINT AND COALITION TEAM TO WIN TODAY’S FIGHT

7. US Air Force kicks off inaugural African Partnership Flight in Ghana (Ghana Business News, 15 Mar 12) … Ekow QuandzieThe inaugural African Partnership Flight (APF) officially opened in Ghana March 12, 2012 with the Airmen from the US Air Forces Africa participating in the event. It took place at Ghana’s Air Force Base Accra, Ghana.

8. U.S. troops numb, uncertain after Afghan massacre (Reuters, 15 Mar 12) … Peter Henderson and Bill RigbyLAKEWOOD, Washington - Around the home base of the American soldier accused of killing 16 Afghan civilians there is a sense of dedication to a tough job, but stress from years of battle in repeated tours in the "sand box" of Iraq and Afghanistan is eating away at troops.

9. U.S. to continue Afghan reconciliation talks (AP, 15 Mar 12) … Anne GearanWASHINGTON - The Obama administration sought to put the best face on an Afghanistan policy called into question Thursday by the apparent shelving of talks with insurgents and announcement


from the U.S.-backed government in Kabul that it will not support the fielding of U.S. forces deep into rural villages, a key goal of the current military strategy.

10. Iraq lessons guide Obama in Afghan withdrawal (AP, 15 Mar 12) … Anne GearanWASHINGTON - Afghanistan is not Iraq, U.S. officials have been fond of saying from the first days of Obama’s presidency.

11.Afghans protest removal of accused U.S. soldier (USA Today, 15 Mar 12) … Tom A. PeterKABUL, Afghanistan - Afghans in restive parts of the country Thursday protested the removal of a U.S. soldier accused of killing 16 civilians while others said it will not cause problems if justice is served.

12.Karzai: NATO should pull back to big bases (AP, 15 Mar 12) … Amir Shah and Sebastian AbbotKABUL, Afghanistan - The American campaign in Afghanistan suffered a double blow Thursday: The Taliban broke off talks with the U.S., and President Hamid Karzai said NATO should pull out of rural areas and speed up the transfer of security responsibilities to Afghan forces nationwide in the wake of the killing of 16 civilians.

DEVELOP AND CARE FOR AIRMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES

NSTR

MODERNIZE OUR AIR, SPACE AND CYBERSPACE INVENTORIES, ORGS AND TRAINING

13.Parts of Ellsworth AFB Off Superfund List (Courthouse News Service, 15 Mar 12) … Travis SanfordWASHINGTON - Parts of the Ellsworth Air Force base outside Rapid City S.D. will be removed from the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund Site list after 40 years worth of chlorinated solvents, metal shavings and waste fuel have been removed from the site.

RECAPTURE ACQUISITION EXCELLENCE

14.U.S. seeks to ease concerns over F-35 delays, costs (Reuters, 15 Mar 12) … UnattributedSYDNEY - The United States sought on Thursday to allay concerns over delays and escalating costs for its new F-35 fighter, telling its eight partner nations there would be no further delays in the rollout of the radar-evading aircraft.

15.USAF Orders Continue For WGS (Aviation Week, 15 Mar 12) … Amy Butler


Boeing’s Wideband Global Satcom began merely as a gapfiller project to provide communications for the U.S. military, but 11 years later the WGS satellites have become the backbone for shuttling the Pentagon’s wideband data.

GLOBAL AIR, SPACE, and CYBERSPACE ENVIRONMENT

16.Swedish Air Force Will Need 60 to 80 New Fighters (Defense News, 15 Mar 12) … Gerard O’DwyerHELSINKI - The Swedish Air Force will require at least 60 to 80 next-generation JAS Gripen fighters to replace its present Gripen fleet. The replacement process should begin no later than 2020, according to a report presented by the Armed Forces Command (AFC) to the Ministry of Defense.

17. Israel And India Boosting Defense Partnership (Aviation Week, 15 Mar 12) … David EshelIndian Foreign Minister Somanahalli Mallaiah Krishna’s visit to Israel in January marked the arrival of the highest-ranking Indian official there in 11 years, and is all the more significant as the Indian governing coalition is now headed by the Congress Party, a faction that traditionally has paid close attention to Muslim sensitivities.

18.Deployed Russian Warheads Could Exceed 2,400, Experts Say (Global Security Newswire, 15 Mar 12) … UnattributedRussia near the beginning of this year appeared to have roughly 2,430 nuclear warheads deployed on active land-, air- and sea-based delivery platforms, though only around 1,560 of the armaments are covered by limits set under a bilateral strategic arms control treaty with the United States, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reported in its latest edition (see GSN, Feb. 27).

ITEMS OF INTEREST

19.Eielson Air Force Base hit with EPA fine (Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, 15 Mar 12) … Matt BuxtonFAIRBANKS - Eielson Air Force Base has agreed to pay $45,700 for mismanaging hazardous waste from vehicle and aircraft maintenance programs and failing to ensure personnel had proper training, according to a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency earlier this week.

20.Optimism & opportunity The avionics market holds opportunities for companies large and small in 2012 and beyond.(Avionics Intelligence, 15 Mar 12) … Courtney HowardBusinesses and professionals in the avionics industry have weathered an economic storm and emerged, in many cases, stronger and wiser. “Our industry (aerospace) made it through the worst recession since WWII,” recognizes Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at Teal Group.

21.How robot planes could learn carrier crew hand gestures Research into flight-deck hand gestures may help the unmanned X-47B stealth plane take off from and land on aircraft carriers. Just don't flip it off.(C-Net, 15 Mar 12) … Tim HornyakMIT researchers are trying to get computers to correctly interpret hand signals used by crews aboard aircraft carriers so that robot planes can follow them.


22.U.S. Weapon Manufacturers Feeling the Wrath of Arms-Control Activists (National Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Sandra I. ErwinU.S. production of air-launched weapons that are widely used by the Air Force and foreign allies might be in jeopardy as a result of a global advocacy campaign that targets manufacturers of military hardware.

23.Manning lawyer wants court-martial dismissal (AP, 15 Mar 12) … Jessica GreskoFORT MEADE, Md. - An attorney for the soldier charged with leaking hundreds of thousands of pages of classified information asked a military judge Thursday to dismiss the charges against his client, arguing the government bungled the turning over of documents in the case.

HEADLINES

CNN at 0530Karzai to meet with families of civilians slain in rampageiPad 3 hits storesBiden goes on offense for campaign

FOX News at 0530Lawyer Hints at Motive in MassacreSenate: Enforce New Teen Driving Rules or Lose $$North Korea to Launch Long-Range Rocket

NPR at 0530Revisiting The Spark That Kindled The Syrian UprisingWith New Film, Obama Hopes For Viral Video BoostFemale Lawmakers Target Viagra, Vasectomies

USA Today at 0530Caller ID spoofing scams aim for bank accountsMore pain expected at the gas pumpHome health care companies' profits up in 2010

Washington Post at 0530Home health care companies' profits up in 2010Gas prices spike, and gallon by gallon, the frustration buildsU.S., NATO plan for measured exit from Afghanistan faces new obstacles

FULL TEXT

BUDGET

B1

Sequestration specter already is making its mark on contractors of 50

SAF/PAX | [email protected] | 703.571.3457 | 16 Mar 12

(Government Executive, 15 Mar 12) … Charles S. Clarkhttp://www.govexec.com/contracting/2012/03/sequestration-specter-already-making-its-mark-contractors/41468/?oref=dropdown

Neither the government nor the aerospace industry can afford to sit and wait for the sequestration required under budget law to kick in on Jan. 2, 2013, an industry chief said Wednesday. The mere threat of across-the-board spending cuts already has had a “chilling effect” on companies that are vital both to the economy and to U.S. national security, said Robert Stevens, chairman and chief executive officer of Lockheed Martin Corp.

Stevens told a Capitol Hill luncheon gathering sponsored by the Aerospace Industries Association that his industry has responded to the budget situation’s “huge disruption” by reducing overhead and cutting investments in training and research and development, as well as imposing “painful” reductions in force.

“We understand the need to address our nation’s fiscal challenges,” he said. “But the prospect of sequestration is another matter entirely,” given the $500 billion in reductions the Pentagon would absorb over 10 years, including $53 billion in fiscal 2013 alone. Such changes would be “divorced from any national strategy and from operational needs,” he said, resulting in “the smallest ground forces since 1940, the fewest ships since 1950, and the smallest Air Force in history.” The country needs a “strategy to preserve the industrial base, not dismantle it,” he added.

Lockheed Martin is part of the association’s ongoing “Second to None” campaign against defense and aerospace industry budget cuts. Near Stevens’ podium the group mounted a large digital clock, a version of which was recently up in New York City’s Times Square, noting the exact number of days, hours, minutes and seconds until the Jan. 2 sequestration. It warns that its industry will lose a million jobs if Congress makes drastic cuts in such areas as defense, the NextGen air traffic management system and the space program.

The association also released a report by Deloitte detailing the financial and economic impact the industry has on the nation, with state-by-state job numbers both direct and indirect. It noted that 19,150 aerospace jobs were eliminated in 2010 and 34,759 in 2011.

Stevens described his industry’s “critical contribution to the economic engine of America” -- $324 billion in sales in 2010, adding 2.3 percent to gross domestic product, and $89.6 billion in exports. He called it a “wellspring of innovation and creativity in technological advancement,” citing development of day-to-day essential products in air safety, weather forecasting and communications connectivity, along with weapons systems that “define a generation.”

But he said the modern industry is by necessity “smaller and leaner” and “fragile in the shadow of sequestration.” He said he “can’t begin to judge the impact of a bow wave of $53 billion" in fiscal 2013 on suppliers, partners and contractors, to whom companies are obligated to provide 60 to 90 days’ notice if workers are to lose jobs.

He expects many equity adjustment requests. “To ask us to react instantly in the year of execution would be massively complicated, and we have no real response,” he said. “It’s all yet to be determined.”


http://www.govexec.com/contracting/2012/03/sequestration-specter-already-making-its-mark-contractors/41468/?oref=dropdown

To avoid sequestration, Stevens said, Congress should consider three elements to address the nation’s $15 trillion debt: spending cuts in both defense and nondefense areas, an examination of tax policy, and entitlement reform.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., co-chairman of the Senate Aerospace Caucus, also urged Congress to act soon. “If we think we’re going to wait until a lame-duck session, we’re kidding ourselves,” he told the group. He highlighted the industry’s importance both to national security and to a healthy export economy, noting he represents the Port of Savannah. “We need to make purchases by other countries easier, though we do need to get the most out of each defense dollar,” he said.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the other leader of the caucus, praised Lockheed Martin as an important symbol of American corporate leadership, adding it is celebrating the 100th anniversary of the founding of its namesake companies. She stressed the need for the government to invest in the education and training of scientists, mathematicians and engineers. She asked the industry for support for a current amendment to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank of the United States, and implored aerospace companies to hire and train veterans.

RETURN

B2

Defense Budget: Some Clues Have Emerged, But More Uncertainty Ahead(National Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Lawrence P. Farrell Jr.http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/April/Pages/DefenseBudgetSomeCluesHaveEmerged,ButMoreUncertaintyAhead.aspx

The political season is upon us, and much of the rhetoric adds little visibility to the direction for defense. If one looks beyond the 2012 election, there are several political and budgetary hard points, some of which will drive and even trump strict defense budget considerations.

There are also fine details emerging from the defense budget, which are sure to roil the debate. Remember, Congress has to act on and pass the budget before it gets to the president for signature.

So far, we know that the Defense Department’s base budget request for fiscal year 2013 is $525 billion — down from $541 billion in 2012 — with $89 billion for overseas contingency operations. The base budget remains flat out to 2017, with no inflation protection, at approximately $523 billion per year. OCO funding is not projected beyond 2012. Recall that the services, the Army especially, are dependent on OCO funding not “falling off a cliff.”

There is a fairly even drop of about 5 percent from 2012 to 2013 in the major accounts. Only research-and-development spending comes down at about half the rate of the other accounts. When OCO is factored in, procurement ends up with about 10 percent of the take. It should be noted that the procurement share of the budget is 18 percent but its share of cuts is 38 percent. The Air Force and Army pay most of the bills. The Air Force, with 11 percent of the budget, pays 23 percent of the bill. The Army, with 18 percent of the budget, pays 53 percent of the bill. The Navy comes out best with a 25 percent share of the budget but paying only 7 percent of the bill.

One can trace these shares and reductions directly to the president’s “pivot to Asia” strategy. The Air Force pegs its cut of A-10 squadrons to the strategy, which backs away from a full two-war demand.


http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/April/Pages/DefenseBudgetSomeCluesHaveEmerged,ButMoreUncertaintyAhead.aspx

The Air Force also says that with a reduced force, it must rely more on multirole assets (read F-35), versus single-mission assets like the A-10.

The Army’s cuts to manpower translate to fewer requirements for vehicles and combat support. This decrease is directly related to the strategy which explicitly backs away from extended stability operations.

The Navy retains 11 carrier battle groups, but retires some cruisers and a mix of old support ships such as oilers. Left unsaid is where Navy force structure goes with the low ship procurement rate programmed across the 2013-2017 budget.

Finally, there are new details on the changes to healthcare for military retirees. Analysts had predicted that these cuts would only apply to future retirees, but they will apply to existing retirees as they are phased in over five years.

Both Tricare Prime and Tricare for Life, both of which are entitlements, will be tiered, based on retirement pay. Tricare premiums for retirees earning more than $45,179 increase by 345 percent over five years: from $460 per year to $2,048. Tricare for Life goes from zero to $475 per person per year in five years. A family of four from the previous example transitions from Tricare Prime to Tricare for Life and still pays approximately $2,000 per year plus picking up the mandatory Medicare payments to qualify for Tricare for Life. Keep in mind that these are proposed changes to an earned benefit —an entitlement. No civilians have been asked for this level of sacrifice. Congressional leaders have been especially critical about these budgetary provisions.

Now to the political and budgetary hard points. The current Congress is faced with a proposed president’s budget that still has a large deficit. Few on either side of the political spectrum are comfortable with a national debt that exceeds 100 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product. Next is sequester. If left unchanged, another $500 billion to $600 billion comes out of defense. This has to be addressed quickly, either by a lame duck Congress or the new 2013 Congress. Administration officials have stated that they have not considered sequester in this budget, but that if any action must be taken on sequester, it will begin in middle to late summer. Stay tuned for this one.

Finally, there is the great turbulence in the Middle East, and in Afghanistan. The Arab Spring uprisings have not brought regimes more supportive of the United States. Note especially Egypt in this category. Now the debate is over what, if anything, the United States ought to do about Syria and Iran. Much pressure is being exerted on the Obama administration to engage in Syria. And with the recent statements by the president and by the Israeli prime minister on Iran, the way ahead is most uncertain there.

Turning to the recent extended conflicts, Iraq’s prospects tend to lean in the direction of Iran, and the most recent controversy and turbulence in Afghanistan make the direction there more than uncertain.

Roll in an election year on top of all this and the prospects for the defense budget being passed as proposed are slim.

And one is left to wonder if a budget will be passed at all, or if a continuing resolution will be left for the next administration and Congress to sort out. In the meantime, U.S. forces remain engaged in many arenas and the demands for resources in the near term will not abate.


A final thought: If the sequester or other additional cuts to defense must be addressed, the strategy itself will need to be modified. Any discussion that emerges on modifications to strategy will presage more cuts to the budget. Keep an eye on that one.

RETURN

B3

Obama's Shift-to-Asia Budget Is a Hollow Shell Game(AOL Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Mackenzie Eaglenhttp://defense.aol.com/2012/03/15/crafty-pentagon-budget-showcases-marquis-programs-while-masking/

If you take the Administration's word for it, the most recent defense budget represents a sober-minded and far-thinking strategic shift from the Middle East to Asia, creating a smaller, high-tech force oriented increasingly towards inter-state conflict and deterrence. Many are even comparing the Pentagon's current vision with that of former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, who sought to transform the five-sided building away from Kosovo-style interventions and create an agile and sophisticated military oriented toward the Pacific.

On the surface, the budget does seem to reflect an Asia "pivot" even though it represents an 8 percent reduction from the planned $571 billion in 2013 defense spending set last February. As defense dollars contract, the budget ostensibly protects the Navy's 11 carrier fleet (although the Navy does not yet know how to pay for all 11), the Air Force's next-generation bomber, and extends the buying cycle of the Joint Strike Fighter instead of reducing procurement. The highest profile programs, for the most part, escape serious cuts. Yet, the budget clocks in with $45 billion in spending reductions. Where did that money come from, and which services won and lost? Conventional wisdom holds that the Navy and Air Force escaped the budget drill mostly intact while the Army endured the bulk of cuts. But the truth is that all of the services are shrinking and aging under the Obama budget.

Laying Off 100,000 Soldiers and Marines But No Civilians

The Army is probably the most visible target of spending cuts. Gone are 80,000 active duty soldiers over the next six years and a minimum of eight brigade combat teams, with potential changes to brigade combat team composition also ahead. It is tough to overestimate the impact of these reductions in force. The Army has been stretched incredibly thin over long counterinsurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Getting the smaller Army back in balance will more difficult to achieve and take longer under new spending plans.

The Army was also hit hard in procurement, with its M1A1 Abrams upgrade and Stryker vehicle program taking 84% and 57% cuts in planned spending, respectively. The one area where the Army did better relative to the other services was in the Operations and Maintenance account. Army O&M funding, which increased nearly 16% from the FY 2012 request, includes more money for maneuver training (although Army range modernization was cut steeply by over $5 billion), ISR logistics support and depot maintenance.

Overall, these Army cuts create real strategic vulnerabilities. As much as the administration might like to wish away potential threats, getting rid of America's capacity to conduct a protracted ground campaign does not make such a scenario any less likely. The past ten years have shown the enemy


http://defense.aol.com/2012/03/15/crafty-pentagon-budget-showcases-marquis-programs-while-masking/

will find a way to adapt to America's perceived vulnerabilities. If lengthy ground wars are perceived as undesirable by America, it is a safe bet that our adversaries will try to take advantage.

Meanwhile, the Marine Corps is busy planning for endstrength cuts beyond those already announced as part of the 2013 budget. Under consideration is the elimination of another infantry battalion and reducing some light armored reconnaissance capability.

Critical Navy Investments in Anti-Access / Area Denial Capabilities Cut

Pentagon plans now retire seven cruisers and two dock landing ships at the same time as the Navy is revising downward its 30-year shipbuilding plan. Military leaders have been quick to point to the ten ships planned for construction over the next fiscal year. The problem is that this figure, as it appeared in the FY 2012 budget, was supposed to be thirteen, not 10. In fact, in the 2012 budget, the Navy requested 57 ships from 2013-2017. The new 2013 budget cuts this to 41 ships. It's hard to see how these dramatic cuts in fleet size fit into the administration's pivot to Asia.

Naval research and development do not fare much better. While the Navy is to be commended on a getting some research initiatives right -- such as breaking out a new account for Future Naval Capabilities focusing on advanced research and prototypes, increasing funding for the Littoral Combat Ship, and increasing funding for the Marine Corps' Assault Vehicles -- many of the Navy's RDT&E decisions do not appropriately resource the rhetorical emphasis on the Pacific.

The budget slices the Power Projection Applied Research account by nearly 15%, affecting programs like precision strike and directed energy weapons. Similarly, Force Protection Applied Research dropped by 27%, cutting innovation in anti-submarine warfare and hull assurance. A 28% cut in Electromagnetic Systems Applied Research affects initiatives such as electronic attack, surface-based anti-cruise and ballistic missile defenses, and the Surface Warfare Improvement Program, or SEWIP, which uses electronic warfare to disarm incoming missiles.

Other R&D cuts impact separate initiatives on anti-submarine warfare, undersea weapons, cyber security, electronic warfare, sensing, SATCOM vulnerabilities, missile defense countermeasures, S and X-band radar integration, and radar defenses against electronic attack. These programs form important parts of the Navy's next-generation arsenal, especially when it comes to the Pentagon's evolving AirSea Battle concept.

They are exactly the type of programs the Pentagon should be protecting if it is serious about emphasizing the unique challenges of the Asia-Pacific. The fact that R&D money declined for these particular Navy programs is a disturbing sign for the overall coherence of the administration's budget.

While the Navy received a $4 billion increase in O&M funding from 2012, it could not come soon enough. The Navy has been stretched past the breaking point in terms of operational readiness, with nearly one quarter of its ships failing their annual inspection in 2011 and cracks in the aluminum superstructure of every cruiser in the Navy's inventory.

The naval readiness crisis was so bad in 2011 that Vice Admiral Kevin McCoy told the House Armed Services Committee that, "we're not good to go." Increased O&M funding for the Navy helps, but more needs to be done in order to fix the fleet. It certainly does not help that the Navy is forced to pay nearly $900 million to retire ships early while the fleet size is already too small.


Various defense officials and military chiefs have testified recently that the services are sacrificing size of the force for either readiness or quality. Given the rapidly rising levels of risk associated with the latest defense budget cuts, it is likely both readiness and quality will decline despite the Chiefs' best efforts.

While the Navy gets some things right in the new budget, it is hardly the unambiguous winner of the conventional wisdom. The Navy is making real sacrifices -- both in terms of fleet size and future innovation -- that may come back to haunt it.

The Air Force Is the Biggest Bill Payer ... Again

Undoubtedly, the U.S. Air Force is the biggest victim in this round of defense budget cuts. The Army and the Navy plan to buy more aircraft than the Air Force next year. Over the next five years, the Air Force plans to buy nearly 200 fewer aircraft than it said it needed just a year ago. The budget eliminates seven fighter squadrons and retires over 300 aircraft early, including many new C-27s and Global Hawk drones. At a time when the United States is flying the smallest and the oldest Air Force in its history, some of the budget choices for air power do not add up.

The budget cuts over 50% from 2012 planned procurement levels of MQ-1 and MQ-9 drones. It also buys 40% fewer C-130J transport planes than in FY 2012. The C-130J cuts are especially puzzling because as many overseas bases are expected to close due to force structure cuts, strategic airlift will only become more important to deliver U.S. forces quickly to troubled regions of the world.

The Air Force budget also features surprising R&D cuts. The service has reduced research funding for both unmanned vehicles and reconnaissance systems -- highly networked programs that seem to fit into the administration's focus on conducting counterterrorism and modernizing to maintain the balance of power in Asia. Additionally, the request cuts a large amount of funding for directed energy weapons across several accounts, as well as electronic warfare capabilities. Other R&D cuts slow down the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, a modernization program absolutely essential to the future strength of the Air Force. The budget also reduces by 15 percent America's already dilapidated nuclear modernization program.

Unmanned vehicles are also not spared the axe in the new budget. Directed energy weapons are widely thought to be a growth area that will be increasingly important as conventional enemies amass ever larger missile inventories. But big reductions are in this year's budget for high energy laser research and the high energy laser advanced technology program, which was zeroed out.

All three of the Air Force's bomber platforms suffer cuts of over 40 percent. Cuts to bomber development hardly make sense given that long-range strike is desired by Pacific commanders who fear that their forces may be locked out of the skies along the Asian littoral. While the next-generation bomber is an important step, America needs intermediate programs that can bridge the gap until the next generation arrives.

Obama Administration Changing the Rules of the Road: From Hard to Soft Metrics

Since the latest defense budget simply does not match the goals or objectives of the newest defense guidance, the Pentagon is becoming increasingly crafty in how it presents information to paint a rosier picture. As the much-lauded shift to Asia turns out to look more like a "paper pivot" based on emphasis by reduction, the Administration is busy changing long-standing metrics. This shift from the


quantifiable and tangible to qualitative and soft metrics is an attempt to thwart forthcoming criticism of a pivot that claims to emphasize air and naval power while the budget shrinks the U.S. Navy and Air Force. By claiming an apples-to-oranges comparison, the Administration and Pentagon leaders will try to mask the realities of diminishing capabilities, their negative consequences and inability to match strategic objectives.

Changing the definition of what constitutes U.S. power and presence abroad more subtly from tangibles to qualified activities is the perfect solution to a budget that cuts U.S. overseas presence and infrastructure, reduces the number of those in uniform, and lessens what they're able to do around the world each day. By changing how Congress traditionally measures presence from hard to soft, defense officials can claim a false comparison in response to any concerns that President Obama is leading a draw down that is too steep, leaves allies in a lurch, or abandons traditional security agreements and commitments.

But it remains impossible for the Obama administration to square the circle: the military cannot maintain or increase its rotational requirements with a smaller force and shrinking capacity. At least, not without tremendous pain, consequence, threat of mission failure and risk to those in uniform.

Squishy Definition of U.S. Overseas Presence Coming

A recent press article by John Bennett at U.S. News & World Report noted that the Obama administration "is ushering in a new era in which the meaning of what constitutes a U.S. military presence in some corners of the globe will look very different than it does today." In his January 5 budget briefing, Secretary Panetta previewed the shift from one focused on overseas bases, permanently-stationed units, air and naval fleet sizes to one that will highlight rotational deployments and participation in military exercises.

The kinds of changes include removing permanent units stationed overseas to forces rotating through a given country or region for brief periods of time. Troops are expected to undertake short-term assignments for periodic training and exercises to offset the loss of forces in Europe, for example. The new budget also assigns an Army brigade combat team with each regional Combatant Commander to maintain cultural and language expertise. However, this is not an ongoing presence like having a carrier home ported in Japan. Rather it could be a short duration rotation with a small unit or larger military exercise that ends quickly.

Trying to Change How The Navy Counts Ships

As the Navy prepares to officially drop its 313-ship fleet size goal, leaders are also considering changes to how the Navy counts ships. Coast Guard cutters, for example, may be counted in future Navy shipbuilding plans to artificially prop up the numbers.

As all of America's armed forces shrink under the latest budget proposal, the rebuttal is often made that because the military has such capable systems now, a smaller fleet of ships, aircraft and vehicles is just as effective as bigger but older ones. Navy leaders have been noting that the increasing capabilities of systems and U.S. ships help offset a reduction in total numbers.

As colleague Bryan McGrath has said, "...the suggestion that networks and precision guided munitions make hull counts unimportant points again to the basic physics problem that naval planners have faced since the Phoenicians -- a ship can only be in one place at a time. Quantity does have a


quality all its own, and ... networks and PGM's are of incalculable value when the Navy is fighting; however they are less important when the Navy is doing what it does the vast majority of the time -- deterring and assuring."

Reality does not change as one ship, one air wing or one brigade combat team can only be in one place at one time around the world. Even with sophisticated technologies and systems in the military, numbers still matter. Often overlooked is that America's military does more than fight. Because U.S. economic growth is connected to the stability and prosperity of the global economy, the nation uses its naval capabilities to protect sea trade, thereby ensuring all maritime assets may transit freely and safely.

White House and Senate in No Hurry to Help the Military

The 2013 defense budget request spreads pain across the uniformed services, components, personnel, states, and industries. Congress is unlikely to pass any defense budget that will be signed into law before the start of the fiscal year. This means for the third year in a row, the Department of Defense will have to start the budget year frozen at last year's funding levels and restricted by the implications of a continuing resolution (CR): no new program starts and no expansion of existing programs allowed.

The unique and negative consequences of operating under a CR and the uncertainty of knowing when the Department will have cash on hand have created significant and avoidable problems for the U.S. military over the past two years. Back in 2011 when the government almost shut down, the military did not receive its formal budget until six months into the fiscal year. But the damage had already been done.

Because Congress did not pass a defense budget on time the past two years, the Navy was forced to shorten the notification time for sailors scheduled to change duty stations from 4-6 months to 2 months or less. Navy maintenance ashore was neglected as a result of the funding freeze and uncertainty and various shipbuilding repairs were canceled outright.

The Army had to impose a temporary hiring freeze for its civilian workforce during that time. Entire production lines at the Red River Army depot in Texas and the Letterkenny Army depot in Pennsylvania were threatened for shut down during the 2011 debate.

Meanwhile, the Air Force was considering the possibility of grounding some of its F-15E fleet due to funding shortfalls. 36 military construction projects were deferred for the Air Force as a result of the budget impasse. New Chinooks for Army troops and new Reaper drones for airmen in Afghanistan all had to wait on hold until Congress could pass a defense budget.

The Specter of Sequestration

The problem this year, however, goes far beyond the challenges of more reduced funding for DoD and operating under a CR. The President and Senate leaders currently have no serious or viable plans to avert sequestration before a lame duck session of Congress come winter. Pentagon leaders will begin planning for sequestration this summer and yet another new strategy exercise will have to be undertaken. What few politicians are discussing is the likely outcome of continued divided government and an election that does not provide a clear mandate for either political party. The odds of sequestration taking effect grow by the day.


While various members of Congress have introduced legislation to replace the sequestration cuts with reductions elsewhere -- including House Armed Services Committee Chairman Representative Howard "Buck" McKeon (R-CA) whose bill has over 70 co-sponsors -- President Obama has repeatedly promised to veto any plan to change sequestration's impact on the military without tax hikes included in the package. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) support the President's plan to force ever more military spending cuts in exchange for taxes going up.

The military's budget will become hostage to Washington's lame duck debate that will center around Bush tax cuts expiring, another vote to increase the debt ceiling, and various other bills expiring like transportation and agriculture. Congress can, of course, do nothing until January 2013 and then follow the solution just passed to extend the payroll tax holiday: debt finance sequestration's impact on the military. The problem is that consequences will begin showing long before January in the military, among the DoD civilian workforce, and within America's shipbuilding and aerospace manufacturing workforce.

RETURN

B4

Air Force to keep one airborne VIP capsule suite -- instead of 10(Nextgov, 15 Mar 12) … Bob Brewinhttp://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20120315_4555.php?oref=topnews

The Air Force has said it will maintain only one controversial airborne VIP suite equipped with a couch and a 37-inch flat-screen TV -- instead of the 10 originally planned to transport high officials.

The service additionally operates four VIP pallets equipped with conference tables and airline-type business-class seats. Earlier this month, Air Force officials said they planned to award a sole-source contract for continued support of the VIP suite and pallets.

The Air Force initially intended to buy 10 of the VIP suites, known as senior leader in-transit conference capsules, until the Project on Government Oversight exposed them as a "breathtaking extravagance" in a highly publicized letter to then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates in July 2008.

Internal documents POGO obtained showed that the Air Mobility Command wanted the $3 million capsules to include "world-class" amenities, including wall-to-wall carpeting, 37-inch flat-screen video monitors, and "aesthetically pleasing" wall and ceiling coverings. The capsules were to be carried on C-130 and C-17 cargo aircraft and KC-135 and KC-10 tanker aircraft.

The four senior leader in-transit pallets, whose total cost POGO estimated at $1.66 million in 2008, featured "four leather business-class chairs with tables" that can be transported in the same aircraft as the capsules, except for the C-130

The Air Force said in a July 2008 press release that military officials would be safer on military aircraft equipped with the airborne VIP systems than on unprotected commercial aircraft.


http://www.nextgov.com/nextgov/ng_20120315_4555.php?oref=topnews

The Air Force Materiel Command issued a notice on March 5 that it planned to award a sole-source contract to Centerville, Ohio-based SelectTech Services Corp. for continued logistics support for its scaled back collection of capsules and pallets.

A spokeswoman for the Aerospace Sustainment Directorate at Robins Air Force Base, Ga., said SelectTech Services was tapped because it was the only company that met the criteria required to sustain the equipment. She put the value of the first year of the contract at $2.1 million and said it had four option years.

Maj. Michael Andrews, a spokesman for the Air Mobility Command, said the one suite in use today is assigned to the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, currently Army Gen. John Allen, and consists of two parts -- a conference capsule and a quarters capsule. Andrews said the suite seats five passengers: two in bucket seats and three on a couch. The space also includes a table work area between the bucket seats, one 37-inch video screen, and connections for externally provided data and voice communications.

The four pallets can support the secretaries of State and Homeland Security, the National Intelligence director, Defense secretary, Defense deputy secretary, chairman and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and combatant commanders, Andrews said. They are located at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst, N.J.; Dover Air Force Base, Del.; Joint Base Charleston, S.C.; and Travis Air Force Base, Calif., he said.

Joe Newman, a POGO spokesman, said while the organization does not expect high-level officials to use wooden crates for seats, the continued costs to maintain the capsule and pallets "do no meet the smell test." Newman said the $2.1 million follow-on contract is "an outrageous amount of money [that] just compounds a previous error."

RETURN

B5

States leaders look to cut fewer guardsmenBut plan calls for cutting more active airmen(Air Force Times, 15 Mar 12) … Brian Everstinehttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/air-force-state-leaders-look-to-cut-fewer-guardsmen-031512/

State leaders are proposing dramatic changes to the Air Force’s proposed budget plan, reversing the movement of aircraft and cutting thousands more active duty airmen to save thousands of guardsmen.

And Air Force leaders said they are listening.

The Council of Governors, a bipartisan group of 10 governors, directed a group of adjutant generals to craft a budget as an alternate to the Air Force’s plan to cut the National Guard in a way that 49 governors and several congressional lawmakers have said is disproportionate.

“We have taken a pragmatic approach that increases combat capability while rebalancing the manpower and force structure cuts from the [fiscal 13 proposal],” according to a summary of the plan


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/air-force-state-leaders-look-to-cut-fewer-guardsmen-031512/

obtained by Air Force Times. “ANG and AF both share in this new plan, with ANG reducing full time manpower and re-missioning within the ANG, and AD shifting force structure to ANG.”

The version, which is not final, states that it would save an additional $700 million by cutting 6,400 active duty airmen, as opposed to the Air Force proposal of cutting 3,900 active duty, 5,100 guardsmen and 900 reservists. The proposal seeks to cut 2,000 guardsmen.

The Air Force plan, part of the president’s 2013 budget proposal, would create a ratio of 62 percent active duty and 38 percent Guard and Reserve airmen, while the Council of Governors’ proposal would make the ratio 57 percent active and 43 percent Guard and Reserve.

Top Air Force officials told lawmakers that service officials were reviewing the proposal and would quickly craft a response.

“This work is ongoing, and we have not yet reached a conclusion,” Air Force Secretary Michael Donley told a Senate Appropriations Defense subcommittee hearing March 14. “But we recognize the need to do so in time to meet the appropriate congressional markups that are in front of us in the next couple of months.”

The plan appears to be gaining traction. Chief of Staff Gen. Norton Schwartz said the service is reconsidering some of the more controversial provisions of the budget, including the movement of eight National Guard C-130s from Texas to Montana, a move that Gulf state governors and Texas lawmakers have blasted. The C-130s are “crucial” to storm response in the region, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, R-Texas, said.

Additional provisions targeted in the Council of Governors proposal include eliminating the 107th Airlift Wing in New York, which would instead become one of four MC-12 units along with Meridian, Miss.; Bradley, Conn.; and Mansfield, Ohio.

On March 15, the entire New York congressional delegation sent a letter to Donley and Schwartz endorsing the Council of Governors’ draft proposal, saying that the plan offers “greater savings and equity.” The delegations from Michigan and Texas have sent similar letters. All 50 adjutants general sent a letter to the Senate in February, to oppose the “flawed processes, assumptions and criteria that produced the Air Force budget request.”

Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., also urged Donley and Schwartz to reconsider the plans to cut the 122nd Fighter Wing at Fort Wayne, Ind., and instead keep A-10s there when not in combat.

“We’re not chaining ourself to the fence here and saying you can’t touch this for any reason whatsoever,” Coats said. “We understand the need to make these reductions. But if there is a means which makes sense and helps you meet your goals and save the funds, we certainly would like to have you give that very, very serious consideration.”

The early version of the governors’ plan also proposes to add three F-16 units in Indiana, Arkansas and Michigan, in addition to retaining an F-16 unit in Iowa. The plan would buy back KC-135s at various locations, keep the C-130 unit in Texas and retain three UAV units in Tennessee, Michigan and Pennsylvania.


The plan is expected to be a main focus when Donley and Schwartz testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 20.

RETURN

CONTINUE TO STRENGTHEN THE NUCLEAR ENTERPRISE

N1

U.S. Senator Presses Nuclear Agency on Lack of Future Funding Details(Global Security Newswire, 15 Mar 12) … Elaine M. Grossmanhttp://www.nti.org/gsn/article/us-senator-presses-nuclear-agency-lack-future-funding-details/

WASHINGTON -- A Senate panel chairman on Wednesday questioned why the U.S. National Nuclear Security Administration has withheld future funding figures for key atomic complex programs in its fiscal 2013 budget request, contrary to a reporting requirement in law (see GSN, Feb. 17).

“The FY-13 budget submission … for the weapons program didn’t contain a five-year projection,” Senator Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) complained at a Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee hearing.

The projections, responded NNSA Administrator Thomas D’Agostino, would not come until “later this year.” His written testimony had set the stage for the verbal exchange, stating with minimal elaboration: “The administration will develop out-year funding levels based on actual programmatic requirements at a later date.”

The White House has requested $11.5 billion in fiscal 2013 for the agency, a semiautonomous arm of the Energy Department. The National Nuclear Security Agency is charged with keeping the nation’s nuclear arsenal safe, secure and effective without explosive testing.

Of the total funds, $7.6 billion would go toward NNSA weapons activities, according to the spending plan. The weapons budget for fiscal 2013, which begins on Oct. 1, would represent a $363 million uptick from this year’s spending level.

For the agency's nonproliferation and naval reactor programs, NNSA budget charts show spending numbers for each of the next five fiscal years. However, future-year amounts for defense programs, safeguards and security, and weapons activities after 2013 are left blank.

The fiscal 2012 defense authorization bill, signed into law on Dec. 31, actually went beyond requiring the five-year projections in calling for an unclassified 10-year budget blueprint. It also demanded year-by-year program plan details for nuclear weapons maintenance and modernization.

The legislation, H.R. 1540, said the program and spending report should be submitted “together with the budget” request for 2013, which the Obama administration sent to Capitol Hill on Feb. 13.

On Wednesday, the subcommittee leader asked D’Agostino to account for the lapse in meeting the reporting requirement, which remains in place for every NNSA budget request through fiscal 2019.


http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/us-senator-presses-nuclear-agency-lack-future-funding-details/

“Can you give us some idea of how this happened?” asked Nelson, a moderate Democrat who announced on Dec. 27 that he will not run for re-election this year. “Or how this would be consistent with what we were seeking a year ago?”

D’Agostino said his agency’s work in assembling its fiscal 2013 budget request was largely complete by the time the 2012 defense bill passed Congress late last year. That left little time to sort out detailed 10-year plans, he suggested.

In addition, the NNSA head noted, last year’s Budget Control Act imposed spending caps on defense programs that could significantly affect the agency’s weapon-related programs in as-yet unknown ways (see GSN, March 8).

Nelson also said that “in some cases where [the budget] did [specify future-year budget figures], such as for naval reactors or nonproliferation, it simply indexed the out-years by inflation.” In other words, the NNSA budget documents projected flat fiscal 2013 funding levels for those programs into each future year, with only economic corrections.

This approach makes it “impossible to satisfy the modernization report which was required under Section 1043 of last year’s defense authorization,” the senator said.

“The details of how the out-years will look [are] being worked on,” D’Agostino said. “We have a joint team with the Defense Department to look at this.”

The two agencies must sort out how the Budget Control Act -- which could roughly double the $490 billion in reductions the Pentagon has already taken in its 10-year spending plans -- might affect the nuclear sector (see GSN, Jan. 6).

The Obama administration in late 2010 pledged to boost nuclear complex spending by $85 billion over the next decade. However, there is debate over whether the deficit-reduction legislation enacted since then should allow a dip into the nuclear spending sector.

Some Republican lawmakers are already taking the president to task for trimming nuclear modernization plans in the new budget request from an earlier-projected $7.9 billion down to $7.6 billion (see GSN, March 9).

"Despite our need for fiscal austerity -- and there is a need -- shortchanging nuclear modernization at a time when we face threats and uncertainty ahead and may even grow is simply not acceptable,” Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the subcommittee’s ranking member, said at the hearing. “I don't know exactly what the amount of money [is that] we need. But the amount that was committed [in 2010] is not provided for in this budget.”

Nelson countered that view in a prepared statement: “Realistically,” in that the Obama nuclear spending pledge was made “nine months before the Budget Control Act became law, falling 4 percent short of the $7.9 billion target is reasonable given the fiscal reality facing us today.”

“There’s a lot of concern, of course [about] … both the NNSA and the Department of Defense having some challenges,” D’Agostino said. “Of course we have challenges. We have a very significant fiscal environment and we have a tremendous amount of work to do.”


He added that some of the work involves negotiating across federal agencies.

“The teams are working to get essentially an agreement sometime this summer,” D’Agostino said. “The question would be exactly how much detail do we put into it.”

His organization is eager to nail down future budget details “because, of course, we need it to get that FY-14 budget built,” D’Agostino said, calling that a “key budget” for the Pentagon and the nuclear agency to be “all on the same page on.”

“We’re together on FY-13, we’re working the out-years together, and we want to get this completed because we know we have a commitment to Congress in order to give you the 1043 report,” he said, referring to the section of the authorization bill that demands the budget document.

Critics charge the delay will deny lawmakers crucial information they need as Congress moves ahead this spring on authorizing and appropriating NNSA and Defense funds for nuclear-weapon programs.

“How will Congress know what it is paying for, when at the same time the NNSA is absolutely notorious for cost overruns?” Jay Coghlan, executive director of Nuclear Watch New Mexico, said in comments e-mailed to Global Security Newswire this week.

As an example, he cited the administration’s 2013 budget request of $369 million for extending the service life of the B-61 nuclear gravity bomb, a $136 million increase over this year’s appropriations despite a two-year slowdown in the program.

The nuclear agency has not yet completed a feasibility study for the overhaul project and had “previously projected that level of funding would not be reached until [fiscal] 2015,” Coghlan said. “Now clearly the rate of spending is being dramatically increased, and total program costs will likely explode, as well. The danger is that congressional funding decisions for NNSA nuclear weapons programs will become more rigid before total program costs are known.”

RETURN

PARTNER WITH JOINT AND COALITION TEAM TO WIN TODAY’S FIGHT

P1

US Air Force kicks off inaugural African Partnership Flight in Ghana(Ghana Business News, 15 Mar 12) … Ekow Quandziehttp://www.ghanabusinessnews.com/2012/03/15/us-air-force-kicks-off-inaugural-african-partnership-flight-in-ghana/

The inaugural African Partnership Flight (APF) officially opened in Ghana March 12, 2012 with the Airmen from the US Air Forces Africa participating in the event. It took place at Ghana’s Air Force Base Accra, Ghana.

The event, hosted by Ghana, is a two-week, military-to-military multilateral and regional engagement designed to improve regional cooperation partnerships, and the readiness of all countries’ service members.


http://www.ghanabusinessnews.com/2012/03/15/us-air-force-kicks-off-inaugural-african-partnership-flight-in-ghana/

More than 160 airmen from the Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria and Senegal air forces were welcomed to the event by Air Commodore Emanuel Ahadome, Ghana air officer, logistics, said the US Africa Command on its website.

Ahadome said the programme would enable participants to exchange ideas and upgrade knowledge of best practices in modern air forces and the aviation industry.

Several Airmen from the US Africa Command, US Air Forces in Europe, Air Mobility Command, Air Combat Command and North Dakota National Guard will support APF, it said.

“At the end, if we do nothing more than strengthen relationships, old and new, that’s value added,” said Col. Dave Poage, APF mission commander.

RETURN

P2

U.S. troops numb, uncertain after Afghan massacre(Reuters, 15 Mar 12) … Peter Henderson and Bill Rigbyhttp://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/13180498/u-s-troops-numb-uncertain-after-afghan-massacre/

LAKEWOOD, Washington - Around the home base of the American soldier accused of killing 16 Afghan civilians there is a sense of dedication to a tough job, but stress from years of battle in repeated tours in the "sand box" of Iraq and Afghanistan is eating away at troops.

"A lot of the guys, especially those with a lot of deployments, have built up a numbness to people being killed or hurt," said one veteran of six tours abroad, including Iraq and Afghanistan, describing his own reaction to the weekend shooting. "The people who hate us are going to put a bad spin on us no matter what we do."

The 33-year-old sergeant says he suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD. He asked not to be identified, since the base has told soldiers not to speak with media.

"These things happen," Vietnam veteran John Haddick, an elder at Lake City Community Church in Lakewood, Washington, said of the weekend killings in Afghanistan.

"It's not going to change individuals that much, this one incident, or their attitude to deployment. They understand it's a hazardous place," said Haddick, who speaks to many serving soldiers and veterans in his role at the church, a 10 minute drive from Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and helps them overcome their ordeal.

TROUBLE SPOT

A U.S. staff sergeant from the base has been detained by U.S. authorities after 16 Afghan civilians, including nine children, were shot dead at the weekend in what witnesses described as a night-time massacre near a U.S. base in Afghanistan's Kandahar province.

A U.S. official said the military flew the soldier out of Afghanistan, and media reports said he was taken to Kuwait.


http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/-/world/13180498/u-s-troops-numb-uncertain-after-afghan-massacre/

Lewis-McChord, 10 miles southwest of Tacoma, Washington, is the largest military base on the West Coast, with about 40,000 military personnel, swelled to more than 60,000 by civilians and families.

Currently, 5,955 troops - including 5,400 Army, 500 Air Force and 55 Air Force Reserve troops - are serving in Afghanistan from the base. That accounts for about 7 percent of the 90,000-strong U.S. force in Afghanistan.

"They are not going to be normal again," said Alicia Underberg, 60, a retiree, in an interview at the nearby Veterans Affairs hospital, where she was helping a retired Marine sniper with PTSD who takes 11 medications daily and sleeps away most of his days.

"They serve so many tours," she said. "What is it going to be like when they try to integrate with society?"

There are concerns that the Army does not always take care of soldiers damaged - physically or mentally - by the rigors of war.

"It's like they break them, and don't want to fix them. So they just find anything to shut them out," said the wife of a sergeant who has served multiple tours of duty in Iraq over a 17-year Army career.

FEAR AND LOATHING

More than 4,000 Army combat soldiers from Lewis-McChord's 2nd Stryker Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, are scheduled for deployment to Afghanistan in April and May.

"If I was to go to Afghanistan, I would be scared," said 23-year-old Alyssa Patrick, a reservist who left her full-time post in the Army in 2010 after serving at a big base in Iraq, which she said felt normal in comparison.

Together the two countries are called "the sand box", she said.

Patrick said a male friend of hers who is single was getting ready to deploy and excited by the prospects of higher pay and a new experience.

"Some people are addicted to war, some are moderate, and some people don't want to go," said a second soldier who declined to be identified.

A third, who once served near the place of the civilian shooting in Kandahar, said his unit had struggled to establish a rapport with locals.

"I put in blood, sweat and tears, and I mean that literally. It just makes it harder. We can't leave like we left Vietnam, scrambling from the embassy rooftop," he said.

The 33-year-old sergeant who spoke of numbness toward violence said the main hit to morale after the Kandahar shooting was having to deal with more training about PTSD.

"Everyone was like, Really? Are you kidding me?," he said. "Somebody screwed up, and we have to do additional training."


Additional reporting by Laura Myers

RETURN

P3

U.S. to continue Afghan reconciliation talks(AP, 15 Mar 12) … Anne Gearanhttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-afghanistan-us-to-continue-reconciliation-talks-031512/

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration sought to put the best face on an Afghanistan policy called into question Thursday by the apparent shelving of talks with insurgents and announcement from the U.S.-backed government in Kabul that it will not support the fielding of U.S. forces deep into rural villages, a key goal of the current military strategy.

The announcements from Afghanistan strike at both elements of the twin-track U.S. exit strategy, which calls for a gradual transfer of security authority to Afghan forces and U.S. talks with Taliban insurgents as a seed for larger political reconciliation talks with the Afghan government.

U.S. spokesmen said the administration will press on with trying to reconcile Afghanistan’s government and Taliban forces willing to renounce terrorism, despite Thursday’s announcement by the militants that they were suspending contacts with the United States. The last substantive talks between U.S. officials and Taliban representatives was in January, and two initiatives to build trust and move toward real peace talks are in limbo.

The Taliban accused the U.S. of failing to deliver on promises and making new demands in the talks, a charge that White House press secretary Jay Carney denied.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded Thursday that U.S. troops leave rural Afghan areas and stay on bases until they finish the withdrawal of troops by the end of 2014. The war effort has been set back in recent days by the weekend slaughter of nine children among 16 people killed allegedly by an American soldier, and earlier by the inadvertent burning of Korans by U.S. troops.

The Obama administration has endorsed negotiation with the insurgents as the best hope for reaching a political settlement in Afghanistan, and entered secret direct talks with Taliban representatives last year. The talks have foundered before, and several people familiar with the contacts characterized the latest news as a temporary but expected setback. They spoke on condition of anonymity to describe sensitive diplomacy.

“There is no likely resolution to the conflict in Afghanistan without a political resolution,” Carney said. “Our conditions for participation in that process by the Taliban have been clear in terms of the reconciliation. Those who would be reconciled need to lay down their arms, renounce al-Qaida (and) promise to abide by the Afghan constitution. And we continue to support that process.”

A senior U.S. official familiar with the discussions said U.S. officials expected some statement from the Taliban backing away from talks, and presume that the timing following Sunday’s killings is an attempt to gain greater leverage over the United States.


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-afghanistan-us-to-continue-reconciliation-talks-031512/

Even before the latest troubles, efforts to negotiate an Afghan settlement were stymied by the Taliban’s unwillingness to negotiate directly with Karzai’s government, which the militants see as illegitimate. Karzai has complained that he was cut out of the talks, complicating his sometimes rocky relationship with Washington.

The Taliban have maintained they want to negotiate only with the United States, the largest donor and largest military force in Afghanistan. The Associated Press previously reported that the U.S. side had agreed to greater Afghan government participation in future talks. That shift appears to underlie the Taliban claim of a change in terms, although their statement was not specific.

As to whether the U.S. has delivered on promises in earlier negotiations, the Taliban were apparently referring to a plan the U.S. has backed publicly to open a Taliban political office in the Gulf state of Qatar, as the Taliban had requested. That plan, although reluctantly endorsed by Karzai, apparently has been delayed by an internal Taliban debate about a public renunciation of international terrorism. The U.S. has made that renunciation a condition for opening the office.

The Taliban also seek release of five prisoners held at the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The AP previously has reported that the U.S. agreed in principle to transfer the prisoners to custody in Qatar, and U.S. officials have publicly acknowledged the idea is in play.

Several Republicans in Congress have denounced the transfer plan, and there has been no apparent progress on it.

State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said the United States has made no decisions to transfer Taliban detainees. She urged continued negotiations with the insurgents.

“We still feel that if there is a process that can be supported, that we ought to do that,” Nuland told reporters. “We remain prepared to continue these discussions,” with a goal of getting the Taliban and the Afghan government to negotiate directly.

In Afghanistan this week, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta met with Karzai and sought to repair the strained U.S.-Afghan relationship. In the aftermath of the killing, Karzai wants NATO to curtail operations in the countryside and accelerate the planned transfer of security responsibilities to Afghan forces.

Although Karzai previously has said he wanted international troops to transition out of rural areas, the apparent call for an immediate exit is new. Karzai also said he wants Afghan forces to take the lead for countrywide security in 2013, which may or may not be in line with a statement Wednesday from President Barack Obama and British Prime Minster David Cameron. They reiterated that the aim of the U.S. and its allies was to get out by the end of 2014, but stated for the first time that international forces would hand over the lead combat role to Afghan forces next year.

A statement released by Karzai’s office said he told Panetta he wants to see “international forces come out of Afghan villages and stay in their bases.”

There was confusion among U.S. military officials and diplomats about just what Karzai was asking, and how far apart he is from current U.S. policy. U.S. officials tried to minimize the differences.


Pentagon press secretary George Little said the issue of leaving villages did come up, and that the U.S. viewed it as a reflection of Karzai’s “strong interest in moving toward a fully independent and sovereign Afghanistan as soon as possible.”

“We share President Karzai’s interest,” Little said. “We believe it needs to be done in a responsible manner.”

The soldier accused of the shootings was part of far-flung “village stability” operations favored by former war commander Gen. David Petraeus and seen as a central element of the counterinsurgency strategy to build trust and skills among local Afghan forces and neighborhood militias. Although the U.S. has walked away from basic pillars of the counterinsurgency strategy, the policy to keep soldiers working and living alongside rural populations has continued.

It was never popular with Karzai, who has said the insurgent problem in his country springs from support across the border in Pakistan, not from unrest in villages. Critics of the U.S. and NATO military plan long have said that a large military footprint, especially in conservative rural districts, encourages violence and bolsters the Taliban argument that they are fighting a foreign occupier.

Associated Press writers Lolita C. Baldor in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, and Donna Cassata and Bradley Klapper in Washington contributed to this report.

RETURN

P4

Iraq lessons guide Obama in Afghan withdrawal(AP, 15 Mar 12) … Anne Gearanhttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-analysis-afghanistan-iraq-lessons-guide-president-obama-031512/

WASHINGTON - Afghanistan is not Iraq, U.S. officials have been fond of saying from the first days of Obama’s presidency.

The difference, they said, was that one war Obama inherited, in Afghanistan, was worth fighting while the other, in Iraq, was best ended as quickly as possible.

Now, Afghanistan has turned into Iraq: an inconclusive slog in which the United States cannot always tell enemy from friend. And as he did with Iraq, Obama has concluded that the fight in Afghanistan is best put to rest.

Just as he patterned his troop surge in Afghanistan on a successful military strategy in Iraq, now Obama is basing his withdrawal from Afghanistan on the Iraq template as well.

Obama and British Prime Minster David Cameron said Wednesday that NATO forces would hand over the lead combat role to Afghanistan forces next year as the U.S. and its allies aim to get out by the end of 2014.

It’s a gradual step away from the front lines, while pushing indigenous forces to take greater and greater responsibility. It’s also a gradual lowering of expectations for a country whose internal


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-analysis-afghanistan-iraq-lessons-guide-president-obama-031512/

divisions and customs bewildered the Americans sent to help and where the U.S. national security goals were often poorly understood.

“Why is it that poll numbers indicate people are interested in ending the war in Afghanistan?” a contemplative Obama asked during a Rose Garden news conference March 14. “It’s because we’ve been there for 10 years, and people get weary.”

Obama and Cameron stressed that they will not walk out on Afghanistan, whose uneven military is not up to the task of defending the entire country. But Obama in particular seemed keen to show he does not have a tin ear.

Afghanistan is Obama’s war — the one he willingly expanded and redefined as a frontal assault on al-Qaida — but like Iraq for former President George W. Bush, the Afghanistan war is becoming political baggage.

Americans have little enthusiasm for the Afghanistan mission in this election year, and a string of violent or distasteful incidents involving U.S. forces have refocused national attention on whether the war is achieving its goals.

The resentment and contempt each side feels for the other appears to have reached some breaking point in Afghanistan, with a rising number of killings of American troops by Afghan recruits this year. The relationship was far from perfect in Iraq, but fratricide was rare by comparison.

Six in 10 Americans see the war as not worth its costs, according to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released March 11 but conducted before news emerged of a massacre of Afghan civilians, apparently by a U.S. soldier.

Just 35 percent said the war has been worthwhile. More Americans have opposed the war than supported it for nearly two years, but the implications are stark eight months before the presidential election.

Opposition to the war is bipartisan, and for the first time the Post-ABC poll showed more Republicans “strongly” see the war as not worth fighting than say the opposite.

“When I came into office there has been drift in the Afghanistan strategy, in part because we had spent a lot of time focusing on Iraq instead,” Obama said, a bit defensively.

“Over the last three years we have refocused attention on getting Afghanistan right. Would my preference had been that we started some of that earlier? Absolutely. But that’s not the cards that were dealt.”

He claimed his strategy has brought the war around the corner. He was careful not to predict victory, or use any of the traditional language of war.

“We’re making progress, and I believe that we’re going to be able to make our — achieve our objectives in 2014,” he said.


In the same poll, a majority of Americans said they think a majority of Afghans are opposed to what the NATO-led mission is trying to accomplish in their country. A majority also said the United States should withdraw troops even before the Afghan army is able to stand on its own.

Obama used Cameron’s visit to endorse a shift toward a back-seat advisory role for U.S. forces in Afghanistan next year, although the war will go on for another year or more. That follows the model of Iraq in 2010, when U.S. forces symbolically pulled back and placed their Iraqi hosts in charge.

He said any sudden drawdown of U.S. forces is unlikely in Afghanistan. If he follows the Iraq model, the reduction will be steady and permanent, and taken with an absence of fanfare. The United States has roughly 90,000 troops in Afghanistan. Obama plans to drop that number to 68,000 by late September but has offered no specific withdrawal plan after that. Britain has the second-largest force in Afghanistan with about 9,500 troops.

Britain is pulling about 500 troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2012, leaving around 9,000 personnel, mainly based in the center of the southern Helmand province.

Officials in London have already cautioned against public hopes that large numbers of troops will be able to leave in the first half of 2013.

Cameron emphasized the scaling back of ambitions since 2001, acknowledging “we will not build a perfect Afghanistan” by the time international forces withdraw from the country. Where his predecessors hailed efforts to improve education, health care and governance, Cameron took office in 2010 saying he would accelerate the training of Afghan troops and police.

He said Britain and the U.S. were now “in the final phases of our military mission,” but — like Obama — did not suggest the timetable for British troops to withdraw would be accelerated.

Like Iraq, the Afghanistan war has been given an artificial expiration date. U.S. and NATO forces will close out their current mission and leave by the end of 2014. The surge forces Obama added will be gone by the end of September.

Obama came into office with an end date in Iraq already set by his predecessor — Dec. 31, 2011. Obama stuck to that schedule but added his own “end of combat” date — Aug. 31, 2010. That gave U.S. forces the remaining months to hand off security control to the Iraqis. By the end, American casualties were rare and U.S. troops often had little to do.

The U.S. and its allies have not yet set a precise “end of combat” date in Afghanistan, although the mid-2013 target Obama articulated Wednesday looks to be the same thing. That calendar would give approximately the same amount of time — roughly 15 months — for U.S. and allied forces to complete the security handoff to Afghan forces.

Like Iraq, fighting is sure to continue in Afghanistan after the transition to an “advise and assist” role for U.S. forces and after U.S. forces quit the country altogether. The relationship between the Afghan security forces and the Afghan government is even more tenuous than it was in Iraq, making it more difficult to ensure that security will hold up after the Americans leave.

By the time the U.S. forces switched to the advisory role in Iraq, the back of the Sunni insurgency had been broken. The same cannot be said for the Taliban-led insurgency in Afghanistan, which causes


most of the U.S. casualties and functions as the main enemy even if Obama’s preferred opponent is the al-Qaida terror network the Taliban once harbored.

RETURN

P5

Afghans protest removal of accused U.S. soldier(USA Today, 15 Mar 12) … Tom A. Peterhttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-afghans-protest-removal-accused-soldier-031512/

KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghans in restive parts of the country Thursday protested the removal of a U.S. soldier accused of killing 16 civilians while others said it will not cause problems if justice is served.

The soldier, who has not been named, was flown to a U.S. military facility in Kuwait on Wednesday night and is being held while the military investigates allegations he killed the villagers in a shooting spree Sunday.

Several hundred people in the southern Afghan province of Zabul on Thursday protested the soldier’s removal. Afghans have staged peaceful protests since the shootings were revealed, but the country has yet to see any major demonstrations such as those that followed the accidental burning of Korans on a U.S. military base last month.

Some Afghans say the suspect’s transfer may not cause any problems if the United States is open and transparent with the case and subsequent legal proceedings.

“This is an act that cannot be justified in any way, in any context, and it has to be addressed,” says Barry Salaam, an independent analyst and civil society activist in Kabul. “As long as he gets the punishment that he deserves, I think that taking out of Afghanistan will not have a big impact. But if taking him out of Afghanistan affects the way he gets punished and the punishment he deserves, then it would be an issue.”

Mirwais Yasini, a member of parliament from Nangarahr province in eastern Afghanistan, says it’s too early to determine how Afghanistan will react. News often travels slowly here and demonstrations usually take place after Friday prayer ceremonies, he noted.

Yasini reiterated calls for an open trial to avoid any potential problems going ahead.

“If there is a trial, even by a military court, it has to be publicized if it’s in Kuwait,” he said. “If they take it to the U.S. that will further complicate the issue, but let’s do it carefully. If not in Kuwait, than in the U.S., but it has to be an open trial.”

In Kuwait, U.S. Army spokesman Lt. Col. David Patterson said Thursday that the detention unit there, known as a Theater Field Confinement Facility, holds pretrial detainees and post-trial confinees for a limited amount of time.


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-afghans-protest-removal-accused-soldier-031512/

The Kuwait detention facilities have been used for other U.S. troops. The most prominent detainee recently was Army Pfc. Bradley Manning, who was held there after he was taken into custody in Baghdad in 2010 for allegedly leaking government documents in the WikiLeaks case.

Advisers to Gen. John Allen, the commander of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan, had recommended the transfer because Afghanistan lacked proper facilities to detain the soldier, according to the Pentagon spokesman. Still, some Afghans were not pleased.

The U.S. informed Afghan leaders that the soldier was going to be moved and “they understood,” said U.S. Lt. Gen. Curtis Scaparotti, deputy commander of American forces in Afghanistan. Moving the suspect will allow the U.S. to provide pretrial confinement, access to legal representation and the ability to ensure fair and proper judicial proceedings, he said.

“It was the demand of the families of the martyrs of this incident, the people of Kandahar and the people of Afghanistan to try him publicly in Afghanistan,” said Mohammad Naeem Lalai Hamidzai, a Kandahar lawmaker who is part of a parliamentary commission investigating the shootings.

In other news:

• President Hamid Karzai on Thursday demanded NATO troops immediately pull out of rural areas.

“Afghan security forces have the ability to keep the security in rural areas and in villages on their own,” Karzai said in a statement after meeting visiting U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.

Panetta did not mention the demand to reporters after his talks with Karzai. Karzai has no authority to order such a pullback by NATO, which has said the village outposts are critical to keeping the Taliban out of areas cleared of insurgents and supported by villagers who receive the protection.

• The Taliban said it was suspending talks with the United States because the Americans failed to follow through on its promises, made new demands and falsely claimed the militant group had entered into multilateral negotiations. The Taliban also said Karzai falsely claimed the Afghan government was involved in three-way peace talks with the militants and the U.S. The Taliban said talking with the Afghan government was “pointless.”

The secretary of the Afghan peace council, which has been pushing for talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban, said it was not clear why the Taliban stopped negotiations. Mohammad Ismail Qasimyar said it could be related to the Taliban’s request that five top Taliban leaders be released from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

RETURN

P6

Karzai: NATO should pull back to big bases(AP, 15 Mar 12) … Amir Shah and Sebastian Abbothttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-karzai-nato-should-pull-back-to-big-bases-031512/

KABUL, Afghanistan - The American campaign in Afghanistan suffered a double blow Thursday: The Taliban broke off talks with the U.S., and President Hamid Karzai said NATO should pull out of rural


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-karzai-nato-should-pull-back-to-big-bases-031512/

areas and speed up the transfer of security responsibilities to Afghan forces nationwide in the wake of the killing of 16 civilians.

The moves represent new challenges to America’s strategy for ending the 10-year-old war at a time when support for the conflict is plummeting. Part of the U.S. exit strategy is to transfer authority gradually to Afghan forces. Another tack is to pull the Taliban into political discussions with the Afghan government, though it’s unclear that there has been any progress since January.

Although Karzai has previously said that he wanted international troops to transition out of rural areas, the apparent call for an immediate exit is new. Karzai also said he now wants Afghan forces take the lead for countrywide security in 2013, in what appeared to be a move to push the U.S. toward an earlier drawdown.

A statement released by Karzai’s office said that during his meeting with visiting U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the president “requested that the international forces come out of Afghan villages and stay in their bases.” Karzai also said that the “Afghan security forces have the ability to provide security in the villages of our country,” the statement said.

But a senior U.S. official said Karzai did not make any demands to have U.S. troops leave villages immediately. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to disclose details of a private meeting, said it’s unclear that the U.S. would be able to pull all of its troops out of the villages even by 2013. He noted that the U.S. plans to continue counterterrorism operations and advising the Afghan forces around the country.

Karzai is known for making dramatic demands and then backing off under U.S. pressure. The call for a pullback — even if aimed at his domestic audience — will likely become another issue of contention between the Afghans and their international allies at a time of growing war weariness in the United States and other countries of the international coalition.

Karzai spoke as Afghan lawmakers were expressing outrage that the U.S. flew the soldier suspected of gunning down 16 civilians early Sunday in two Afghan villages to Kuwait on Wednesday night. They were demanding that the suspect, a U.S. Army staff sergeant, be tried in the country.

Asked if Karzai’s request was a response to the shooting spree, Foreign Ministry spokesman Janan Mosazai said that Karzai had long asked that military operations cease in rural areas because that’s not where terrorism is rooted. But he added: “The shootings were an unforgivable act of murder in Kandahar. It’s just one other argument for why Afghan soldiers should increasingly lead when it comes to Afghan people in the villages.”

Afghan security forces know “a thousand times better than any foreign troops the culturally sensitive ways of dealing with their own people,” the spokesman said.

If the NATO troops do pull back, it would leave vast areas of the country unprotected including border areas with Pakistan. It would essentially mean the end of the strategy of trying to win hearts and minds by working with and protecting the local populations.

The American accused of killing the civilians was stationed on just such a base, where a small group of soldiers worked with villagers to try to set up local defense forces and strengthen government. The accused soldier, who has not been named, is suspected of going on a shooting rampage in villages


near his base in southern Afghanistan, killing nine children and seven other civilians and then burning some of their bodies.

Karzai told Panetta that everything must be done to prevent any such incidents in the future, including speeding up timelines for NATO pullbacks.

The meeting took place a day after President Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron said in Washington that they and their NATO allies were committed to shifting to a support role in Afghanistan in 2013 — a year earlier than scheduled. But it appeared that Karzai was requesting the change take place at the beginning of — rather than over the course of — 2013.

Obama gave his fullest endorsement yet for the mission shift, but he said the overall plan to gradually withdraw forces and hand over security in Afghanistan will stand.

In January, after French President Nicolas Sarkozy suggested that foreign forces speed up their timetable for handing combat operations to Afghan forces in 2013, Karzai said he would favor that — if it were achievable.

The Taliban said it was suspending talks with the U.S. because the Americans failed to follow through on its promises, made new demands and falsely claimed the militant group had entered into multilateral negotiations.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a statement that they had agreed to discuss two issues with the Americans: the establishment of the militant group’s political office in Qatar and a prisoner exchange. The Taliban said the Americans initially agreed to take practical steps on these issues, but then “turned their backs on their promises” and came up with new conditions for the talks.

“So the Islamic Emirate has decided to suspend all talks with Americans taking place in Qatar from today onwards until the Americans clarify their stance on the issues concerned and until they show willingness in carrying out their promises instead of wasting time,” Mujahid said. The Taliban refers to itself as the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

“We must categorically state that the real source of obstacle in talks was the shaky, erratic and vague standpoint of the Americans, therefore all the responsibility for the halt also falls on their shoulders,” he said.

The Taliban also said Karzai falsely claimed the Afghan government was involved in three-way peace talks with the militants and the U.S. The Taliban said talking with the Afghan government was “pointless.”

Panetta applauded Karzai last month for telling an interviewer that the U.S., Afghan government and the Taliban recently held three-way talks aimed at moving toward a political settlement of the war.

The Taliban denied the claim at the time.

Afghan officials told The Associated Press that the U.S. had agreed in January to include representatives of the Karzai government in future meetings, but U.S. officials would not confirm that. U.S. officials did say that if this initial trust-building phase of contacts with the Taliban blossoms into full peace negotiations, the U.S. would sit alongside the Taliban and the Afghan government.


The secretary of the Afghan peace council, which has been pushing for talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban, said it was not clear why the Taliban stopped negotiations with the United States.

Mohammad Ismail Qasimyar speculated that it could be related to the Taliban’s request that five top Taliban leaders be released from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

He said Afghan government needs to be involved in the negotiations.

“In the past, we did a lot of preliminary work to build trust and goodwill for talks,” he said, adding that if the Afghans are not involved, any peace process won’t work.

Associated Press writers Heidi Vogt and Sebastian Abbot in Kabul, Mirwais Khan in Kandahar, Lolita C. Baldor in Abu Dhabi, Kathy Gannon in Islamabad and Adam Schreck in Kuwait City contributed to this report.

RETURN

DEVELOP AND CARE FOR AIRMEN AND THEIR FAMILIES

NSTR

MODERNIZE OUR AIR, SPACE AND CYBERSPACE INVENTORIES, ORGS AND TRAINING

M1

Parts of Ellsworth AFB Off Superfund List(Courthouse News Service, 15 Mar 12) … Travis Sanfordhttp://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/15/44710.htm

WASHINGTON - Parts of the Ellsworth Air Force base outside Rapid City S.D. will be removed from the Environmental Protection Agency's Superfund Site list after 40 years worth of chlorinated solvents, metal shavings and waste fuel have been removed from the site.

In operation since 1942, Ellsworth has been a training facility for B-17 bomber crews, the operations headquarters of the Titan I intercontinenal ballistic missile and the Minuteman I and Minuteman II missile systems. It is currently the home base of the 28th Bomb Wing consisting mostly of B-1B Lancer strategic bombers.

The 4,858 acre base was placed on the list of the most heavily polluted industrial sites in the U.S. in 1990. Investigation and clean-up began in 1992 when the site was subdivided into twelve operational units for clean-up.

In 2006 clean-up at most operational units was completed and they were removed from the Superfund list.


http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/03/15/44710.htm

The current action removes three operational units from the list, leaving only the contaminated groundwater plume under the base as the last unit in need of remediation.

The public has until April 12 to comment on the EPA's proposal.

RETURN

RECAPTURE ACQUISITION EXCELLENCE

A1

U.S. seeks to ease concerns over F-35 delays, costs(Reuters, 15 Mar 12) … Unattributedhttp://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-lockheed-fighter-usabre82e0dn-20120315,0,3774659.story

SYDNEY - The United States sought on Thursday to allay concerns over delays and escalating costs for its new F-35 fighter, telling its eight partner nations there would be no further delays in the rollout of the radar-evading aircraft.

The F-35 partners' meeting in Sydney was the second in two weeks, following one in Washington, as some nations review their orders for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.

"We have been given the adequate time needed to execute the program," Air Force Major General John F. Thompson, deputy Joint Strike Force Program Executive Officer, told reporters.

"There was plenty of lively discussion on affordability and production. What we pledged today was to maintain a very open line of communication."

The U.S. Defense Department is restructuring for a third time its $382 billion F-35 program with Lockheed Martin Corp to allow more time for development and testing.

Continued schedule delays and talk of lingering technical issues have prompted some countries to rethink their orders. The group includes Britain, Australia, Turkey, Canada, Denmark, Norway, Italy and the Netherlands.

The Canadian government, which has been a staunch defender of the costly F-35 program, said on Tuesday it had not ruled out the idea of withdrawing. Canada plans to buy 65 warplanes.

Japan, which has ordered 42 F-35s, has also warned Washington it may cancel orders due to rising costs.

The Pentagon last month said it was putting off its own orders for 179 F-35s over the next five years to save $15.1 billion, as President Barack Obama seeks $487 billion in defense budget cuts over the next decade.

Lockheed Martin said the postponement would increase the price of the warplane. U.S. officials insist they have not changed their plans to develop and buy a total of 2,443 jets.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/sns-rt-us-lockheed-fighter-usabre82e0dn-20120315,0,3774659.story

The long-awaited first flight of an F-35 last week at Eglin Air Force Base in Florida was cut short by a possible fuel leak.

"I am absolutely confident that we will get where we want to go," said Thompson. "But from a procurement standpoint, it's up to each partner to decide what they want to procure and how much they want to procure to address their capability gaps."

Britain, the biggest outside contributor to F-35 development, has said it would wait until 2015 to decide how many jets to buy. Australia will decide in 2012 whether to continue with the purchase of 100 F-35 jets.

The United States expects to sell more than 700 F-35s to international partners over the next decade.

RETURN

A2

USAF Orders Continue For WGS(Aviation Week, 15 Mar 12) … Amy Butlerhttp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/03/12/AW_03_12_2012_p47-431790.xml&headline=USAF%20Orders%20Continue%20For%20WGS

Boeing’s Wideband Global Satcom began merely as a gapfiller project to provide communications for the U.S. military, but 11 years later the WGS satellites have become the backbone for shuttling the Pentagon’s wideband data.

And at a time when the Pentagon is planning to cut $487 billion over 10 years, WGS is being hailed as an example of an efficient satellite procurement.

This productivity shows in the Pentagon’s orders. WGS started in 2000 as a two-satellite buy to bridge a gap until the ambitious, but now defunct, Transformational Satellite Communications (TSAT) constellation began operations. Today, Pentagon officials are planning to buy at least 10 of the WGS satellites.

This order uptick is attributable to more than the demise of TSAT in 2009. Air Force acquisition chief David Van Buren notes that the service and Boeing worked cooperatively to reduce the per-unit price of the satellites, allowing for additional purchases and international participation in populating the constellation.

“The reason the department has decided to buy more WGS is the cost model is getting significantly cheaper,” says David Madden, director of the Air Force’s military satellite communications program office in Los Angeles. He says that in planning for Satellites 7-9, the team reduced per unit cost by at least $80 million.

This is partly possible because the WGS payload is housed in Boeing’s commercial 702HP satellite bus. Van Buren notes that the cost for the bus is known, allowing for the Air Force to zero in on the “delta” in the pricing for the military-specific needs. The Air Force “tailored” the program to reduce the statement of work; this was partly due to the use of some commercial practices. The Air Force also opted to reduce some testing processes, given the success of the three satellites already in orbit.


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/03/12/AW_03_12_2012_p47-431790.xml&headline=USAF%20Orders%20Continue%20For%20WGS

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=space&id=news/awst/2012/03/12/AW_03_12_2012_p47-431790.xml&headline=USAF%20Orders%20Continue%20For%20WGS

“Building space hardware for both commercial and government customers in our El Segundo [Calif.] factory enables common processes and procedures to be shared across programs,” according to Mark Spiwak, Boeing WGS director. One example is the use of lean manufacturing techniques to build phased array antennas based on lessons from the company’s commercial Spaceway work.

He notes that the Air Force is implementing a “commercial-like operating model [to] streamline testing and reduce government oversight without compromising mission assurance.”

Though not originally envisioned as the wideband constellation of the future, the WGS design was expected from the start to shoulder most of the wideband traffic. A single WGS satellite—capable of transmitting in Ka- and X-band frequencies—is able to move 10 times the amount of traffic of the entire Defense Satellite Communication System (DSCS) still in orbit today.

Already, the three operational WGS satellites are handling 90% of the wideband requirements for the Pentagon, with the remaining 10% handled by the seven operational DSCS spacecraft and the Navy’s Ultra-High-Frequency Follow-On/G satellites, according to Bob Little, wideband branch chief for U.S. Army Strategic Command, which operates the WGS payload.

Terminals capable of operating with the new WGS satellites are still being introduced into service. But, in general, Little says: “We are seeing the transfer of commercial satcom usage to WGS, but it is really too early to see a decrease in commercial usage; as commercial bandwidth becomes available, it is quickly consumed with new user requirements.”

One example of WGS usage is by ships, which can now communicate with “much higher data rates” than they would by using DSCS or commercial systems.

WGS also features a “crossbanding” capability that allows for the satellite to receive data in one frequency and transmit in another. For example, an X-band transmission can be relayed to a user with a Ka terminal. Little says this crossbanding capability has “changed the way we plan [for] wideband satcom users and allows more flexibility in support to all users with varying terminal types.” The system will facilitate more mobile users and more areas of coverage—19 versus six with DSCS alone.

One WGS each is currently supporting operations in the Pacific region, over the Indian Ocean (including activities in Iraq and Afghanistan) and Europe, says Col. Michael Lakos, Air Force Space Command’s lead officer for milsatcom. An operating slot has not yet been identified for WGS-4, which launched on Jan. 19. Global coverage will include five satellites; the fifth is slated for launch in January 2013. He says the Air Force plans to continue using the remaining DSCS satellites for X-band communications until they die. They were designed by Lockheed Martin for 10 years of life in orbit, and the average age is 13.74 years.

WGS-4 is nearing its testing slot in geosynchronous orbit more than 22,000 mi. over Earth. It is slated for operational use around July after a period of spacecraft and payload testing, says Lakos.

WGS-4 is the first Block II satellite that includes a radio-frequency bypass to allow for transmission of high-bandwidth airborne intelligence imagery at roughly three times the rates of Block I satellites, Spiwak says.


The Air Force is planning for nine WGS satellites, and approval has been given to buy a tenth. Of those, the sixth is being purchased by Australia and the ninth by an international consortium including Canada, Denmark, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and New Zealand.

Meanwhile, the Air Force is studying what enhancements could be added to WGS. Little says operators often ask for more communications on the move to support so-called disadvantaged users, or those that cannot carry large antennas for data transfer. Boeing is examining the use of a new high-gain antenna to facilitate this mission. “Given the capability of the Boeing 702HP platform, efficient package of these antennas along with the existing WGS antennas can be easily and cost-effectively accomplished,” he says.

Ground-based users also hope to incorporate more anti-jam capabilities into the system as well as increased coverage for both the X- and Ka-band frequencies.

The Air Force is also in the midst of a sweeping future milsatcom study, with results expected in June. This exercise was begun after the demise of TSAT and must take into account infusing the entire architecture—from air- and space-borne assets to terrestrial systems—with resiliency so that a failure cannot cripple the entire global network. Accordingly, the service is looking at what the future military/commercial requirements will be for wideband communications, Lakos says. He notes that the Air Force will pursue modest capability improvements for WGS, but the “biggest limitation will be the budget.”

RETURN

GLOBAL AIR, SPACE, and CYBERSPACE ENVIRONMENT

G1

Swedish Air Force Will Need 60 to 80 New Fighters(Defense News, 15 Mar 12) … Gerard O’Dwyerhttp://www.defensenews.com/article/20120315/DEFREG01/303150005/Swedish-Air-Force-Will-Need-60-80-New-Fighters?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

HELSINKI - The Swedish Air Force will require at least 60 to 80 next-generation JAS Gripen fighters to replace its present Gripen fleet. The replacement process should begin no later than 2020, according to a report presented by the Armed Forces Command (AFC) to the Ministry of Defense.

The report was given to the Parliamentary Defense Committee (PDC) on March 15.

“The capability upgrade of Sweden’s fighter jet system should commence in 2020, and we estimate that it will take 10 years to complete. Sweden needs at least 60 to 80 planes. The upgrade of the JAS Gripen is necessary to guarantee that our fighter jet system is operatively relevant and that our air defense over the long term can meet the practical needs of the outside world,” the report states.

The AFC’s report recommends that the next-generation (NG) JAS Gripen include a bigger hull, a more powerful engine and the ability to carry a broader array of weapons.


http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120315/DEFREG01/303150005/Swedish-Air-Force-Will-Need-60-80-New-Fighters?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

http://www.defensenews.com/article/20120315/DEFREG01/303150005/Swedish-Air-Force-Will-Need-60-80-New-Fighters?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE

“This will allow room for more weapons and more fuel, which in turn leads to higher efficiency and durability,” the report states. Additionally, the report says, funding will be sought to equip the NG Gripen with improved radar, situational awareness and countermeasures systems.

Swedish defense chief Gen. Sverker Göranson said the project would be “highly capital intensive,” but declined to speculate on the final cost of procurement.

“Discussions will soon start regarding costs. It would therefore be wrong to discuss openly how much we have planned that it should cost,” Göranson said.

The MoD’s provisional estimates put the cost of 80 aircraft at between $4 billion and $5 billion. The Swedish government hopes to reduce its spending by sharing the cost with one or more international partners, a solution supported by the AFC.

The report is based on almost two years of analysis covering the development of different alternatives and model configurations. All have been tested in extensive simulations and operative games, against both known and projected threat scenarios, Göranson said.

RETURN

G2

Israel And India Boosting Defense Partnership(Aviation Week, 15 Mar 12) … David Eshelhttp://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2012/03/01/DT_03_01_2012_p15-427648.xml&headline=Israel%20And%20India%20Boosting%20Defense%20Partnership

Indian Foreign Minister Somanahalli Mallaiah Krishna’s visit to Israel in January marked the arrival of the highest-ranking Indian official there in 11 years, and is all the more significant as the Indian governing coalition is now headed by the Congress Party, a faction that traditionally has paid close attention to Muslim sensitivities.

But the visit is even more important financially. Defense business between the two nations amounts to around $5 billion but could reach an estimated $15 billion. It is no longer a secret that Israel has become one of India’s top defense suppliers and partners.

Among recent big-ticket Israeli arms sales to India were Rafael’s $1 billion contract in 2009 to provide 18 Spyder surface-to-air missile systems by 2012, as well as Israel Aerospace Industries’ (IAI) $1.1 billion deal that same year for the advanced Barak 8 tactical air-defense system for warships. India launched an IAI-built Risat-2 all-weather spy satellite from the Sriharikota site in southern Andhra Pradesh state, forging strategic cooperation in space projects. Meantime, the Indian air force (IAF) is seeking government approval to order two additional Il-76 Phalcon AWACS aircraft for $800 million, expanding the current fleet of three aircraft procured by the IAF under the previous $1.1 billion program. And Indian Air Chief Marshal P. V. Naik said the IAF would buy two more Phalcons. “Phalcon AWACS are tremendous force-multipliers. We are having an excellent experience with them,” he said.

The system comprises an Israeli Elta EL/M-2075 active, electronically scanned array (AESA) radar mounted on an Il-76. The Elta system mounts three radar antennas, each providing 120-deg. coverage, in a non-rotating radome on top of the aircraft. It is capable of simultaneously tracking 60


http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2012/03/01/DT_03_01_2012_p15-427648.xml&headline=Israel%20And%20India%20Boosting%20Defense%20Partnership

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/dti/2012/03/01/DT_03_01_2012_p15-427648.xml&headline=Israel%20And%20India%20Boosting%20Defense%20Partnership

targets, including ballistic missiles rising into the sky, low-flying aircraft and cruise missiles up to 400 km (250 mi.) away. The aircraft also can be used to direct air defense fighters during combat operations. The Phalcons are being inducted into the newly raised 50 Squadron based at Agra air base.

India also has expressed interest in Israel’s Arrow 2 anti-ballistic missile system jointly manufactured by IAI and Boeing. But the technology transfer involved could impede the sale since U.S. approval would be required and the countries have had past differences about such matters.

The IAF and army are planning to field guided missiles under several parallel programs currently in the acquisition process. To enable Rafael to participate as a sole bidder in the open tender, the Indian army obtained a special permit. Another obstacle for other competitors was India’s insistence on unique performance—demanding that the system entail an “active-passive fire-and-forget guidance system,” which only Rafael can offer. Off-the-shelf third-generation (3G) missiles employ passive sensors to lock on the target before launch, and perform “fire-and-forget” engagement. Only Rafael’s Spike can offer active-passive 3G fire-and-forget—including the ability for the user to correct the missile’s aiming while in flight. The Indian requirement sidelined the standard laser-guided Hellfire missiles carried on Boeing Apache Longbow attack helicopters. Still, since India’s services favored the Apache for their next high-performance gunship, it is likely they will take it with its standard weapons, rather than make a significant investment in modifying its avionics and fire-control system to integrate other missiles.

A parallel acquisition by the Indian army is a lightweight guided missile for the infantry. Rafael’s Mini-Spike could become a contender for this program. As far as industrial participation and technology transfer, if Rafael eventually wins the order, the Indians will get the first deliveries of the missiles made in Israel but Rafael is likely to shift production to India, as it has done in other markets like Poland and Spain.

Likewise, Rafael and Bharat Dynamics have recently stepped up their dialog with plans to establish a local joint venture. The companies are currently seeking a private sector, Indian-based partner to join the company. This selected company will become the local entity to acquire the know-how and production technologies to deliver the weapon’s critical subsystems, including missile seekers for air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles and the Spike’s electro-optical seekers.

RETURN

G3

Deployed Russian Warheads Could Exceed 2,400, Experts Say(Global Security Newswire, 15 Mar 12) … Unattributedhttp://www.nti.org/gsn/article/deployed-russian-warheads-could-exceed-2400-report/

Russia near the beginning of this year appeared to have roughly 2,430 nuclear warheads deployed on active land-, air- and sea-based delivery platforms, though only around 1,560 of the armaments are covered by limits set under a bilateral strategic arms control treaty with the United States, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists reported in its latest edition (see GSN, Feb. 27).

New START, which entered into force on Feb. 5, 2011, requires the United States and Russia by 2018 to each reduce deployment of strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from a cap of 2,200


http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/deployed-russian-warheads-could-exceed-2400-report/

mandated by this year under an older treaty. It also limits the number of fielded strategic warhead delivery platforms to 700, with an additional 100 systems permitted in reserve.

The pact's rules count nuclear bombers as each containing a single nuclear weapon, "regardless of its actual assigned load," according to issue experts Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris. Warheads count individually toward treaty limits if they are deployed on launch-ready ICBMs or submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Russia is likely to have placed almost 1,490 nuclear warheads on 434 active-duty ballistic missiles, the analysis states. In addition, 950 more warheads are linked to submarines undergoing maintenance and to 72 aircraft. Moscow routinely rotates its ballistic missile submarines out of service for refurbishment; vessels undergoing updates do not hold their assigned armaments, according to the report.

Moscow is also believed to hold roughly 2,000 tactical nuclear warheads "in central storage" and another 5,500 weapons that have been taken out of service ahead of possible disassembly (Kristensen/Norris, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March 5).

RETURN

ITEMS OF INTEREST

I1

Eielson Air Force Base hit with EPA fine(Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, 15 Mar 12) … Matt Buxtonhttp://newsminer.com/view/full_story/17879981/article-Eielson-Air-Force-Base-hit-with-EPA-fine?instance=home_news_window_left_top_2

FAIRBANKS - Eielson Air Force Base has agreed to pay $45,700 for mismanaging hazardous waste from vehicle and aircraft maintenance programs and failing to ensure personnel had proper training, according to a settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency earlier this week.

The fines came out of a 2010 inspection where EPA investigators found the base had failed to fix a number of problems regarding its hazardous waste handling that had been identified in a 2008 inspection. The penalty is less than a quarter of what was initially suggested by the EPA. The base was found to have various violations relating to how it handled waste that included coating with the carcinogenic chromium, toxic and flammable paint solvents and florescent light tubes containing mercury.

EPA spokesman Mark MacIntyre said the settlement had to do with the waste management and training practices and said there isn’t evidence that employees or the community were harmed by the chemicals.

“What they’re trying to do is prevent people from getting hurt and prevent the community from getting exposed,” he said.


http://newsminer.com/view/full_story/17879981/article-Eielson-Air-Force-Base-hit-with-EPA-fine?instance=home_news_window_left_top_2

The alleged violations, which occurred under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, include a failure to determine if waste was hazardous, failure to have adequate training plan in place for facility workers handling hazardous waste, improper labeling to clearly identify hazardous waste, failure to conduct regular inspections of hazardous waste containers and improper management of fluorescent lamps containing mercury. In addition to the penalty, the settlement requires the base to make improvements to comply with hazardous waste laws, MacIntyre said.

“If you’re handling hazardous waste or chemicals if they’re not stored properly and they’re not labeled properly, there can be serious consequences,” he said.

RETURN

I2

Optimism & opportunityThe avionics market holds opportunities for companies large and small in 2012 and beyond.(Avionics Intelligence, 15 Mar 12) … Courtney Howardhttp://www.avionics-intelligence.com/articles/2012/03/optimism-opportunity.html

Businesses and professionals in the avionics industry have weathered an economic storm and emerged, in many cases, stronger and wiser. “Our industry (aerospace) made it through the worst recession since WWII,” recognizes Richard Aboulafia, vice president of analysis at Teal Group. The commercial market is now investing in the aerospace product and the future looks bright, especially for Airbus and The Boeing Company. Industry analysts anticipate 2012 to be a year of recovery, bringing a wealth of new orders for manned and unmanned aircraft, as well as myriad modern avionics.

Integrated and modular

Today’s avionics are really good, true fifth-generation systems and generally moving to an integrated, modular architecture (IMA), notes Wayne Plucker, senior industry analyst in the Aerospace and Defense Group at Frost & Sullivan in San Antonio, Texas. A growing number of modern aircraft take advantage of IMA-based avionics.

The Dassault Rafale twin-engine, delta-wing, multi-role jet fighter, designed and built by Dassault Aviation in Paris, boasts the Modular Data Processing Unit (MDPU) IMA from Thales in France. “The Rafale integrates the largest and most modern range of sensors by means of the multi-sensor data fusion concept that allows the pilot to access global situational awareness and make well-informed tactical decisions,” according to a company spokesperson. “This data fusion process links all sensors via the MDPU to make the Rafale a truly network-centric warfighter.”

Similarly, the Boeing 787 Dreamliner employs the Common Core System (CCS), which GE Aviation Systems engineers in Grand Rapids, Mich., developed on the VxWorks 653 partitioned operating environment from Wind River in Alameda, Calif. GE’s CCS—which has been likened to the aircraft’s central nervous system and the backbone of the Boeing 787's computers, networks, and interfacing electronics—provides the primary computing environment for the Dreamliner.


http://www.avionics-intelligence.com/articles/2012/03/optimism-opportunity.html

“We’re going to end up with de facto mainframes and people strapping on plug-and-play technologies, including weapons systems, sensor suites, etc.,” Plucker predicts. “Ultimately, it will lead to opportunities for smaller companies, rather than the giants of the industry.”

UAV upgrades

As avionics technology moves more and more toward a common platform, common control, and common data link, pressure will mount to convert and modernize many legacy unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), adds Plucker, who foresees a wealth of UAV modifications. “Look for it to continue to be strong,” he says, “but only in the sense of systems modifications to move toward some form of commonality.”

UAV maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) will bring increased opportunities for providers of avionics systems, components, software, and services. “It is going to be a good area for those who are already delivering into that space to provide system tweaks,” Plucker advises. Upcoming contracts generally do not favor those trying to enter the market, however, unless they bring to the table something unique—“some unique something that the military says, ‘I’ve got to have that to modify this thing.’”

UAVs have been, and continue to be, a hotbed of avionics investment, innovation, and activity. The UAV market segment will continue to advance, expand, and prosper, extending beyond the defense realm, with growth in commercial and private UAV activities.

Unmanned avionics

The worldwide UAV market will total more than $94 billion, predict analysts at The Teal Group, an aerospace and defense market analysis firm in Fairfax, Va. They credit UAVs, in fact, as the most dynamic growth sector of the world aerospace industry this decade. Teal analysts, in a 2011 market study, estimate that UAV spending will almost double over the next decade, from current worldwide UAV expenditures of $5.9 billion annually to $11.3 billion, totaling just over $94 billion in the next 10 years.

“The UAV market will continue to be strong despite cuts in defense spending,” reveals Philip Finnegan, director of corporate analysis at The Teal Group. “UAVs have proved their value in Iraq and Afghanistan and will be a high priority for militaries in the United States and worldwide.”

“Officials of the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) plan to spend at least $5.78 billion to buy and develop unmanned vehicles and unmanned vehicle payloads next year,” explains John Keller, chief editor of Military & Aerospace Electronics and editorial director of PennWell’s Aerospace & Defense Group in Nashua, N.H., in his analysis of the Pentagon's budget documents released 13 Feb. 2012.

DOD officials plan to buy at least 690 unmanned vehicles next year, including: a planned $769.88 million Army buy of 40 General Atomics MQ-1 Reaper weaponized UAVs, a $25.8 million Army purchase of 234 RQ-11 Raven UAVs, a $786.79 million U.S. Navy buy of 19 InSitu Small Tactical Unmanned Air System (STUAS) unmanned aircraft, a $314.22 million U.S. Air Force buy of four MQ-9 Reaper UAVs, and a $217.24 million U.S. Special Operations Command purchase of one AeroVironment RQ-11 Raven UAV.


Analysts at Visiongain, an independent business information provider in London, expect the military aircraft avionics market to reach $16.94 billion in 2012, as militaries around the world continue to develop and upgrade the avionics capabilities for a number of military settings and roles.

“The market for military aircraft avionics is set for expansion over the coming years, as not only will prominent militaries, such as the U.S., want to continue to upgrade their airpower capabilities, but emerging nations, such as India, China, Brazil, and Saudi Arabia, will also be seeking to develop their own air forces,” a Visiongain analyst says. “The recent campaign in Libya highlighted that air power is still very much relevant to today's world, and avionics are a central part of this.”

Payload predictions

The UAV payload market is projected to grow from $2.6 billion in Fiscal Year 2011 to $5.6 billion in Fiscal Year 2020, according to Teal Group analysts. Investment will increase in a variety of UAV payloads, including electro-optic/infrared sensors (EO/IR); synthetic aperture radars (SARs); signals intelligence (SIGINT) and electronic warfare (EW) systems; command, control, communications, computers, and intelligence (C4I) systems; and chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) sensors.

“Few now question the U.S. Air Force's claim that ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) is 'the centerpiece of our global war on terrorism' with production beginning for major endurance UAV systems, such as MP-RTIP (Multi-Platform Radar Technology Insertion Program) and ASIP (Aircraft Structural Integrity Program); new RDT&E (research, development, test and evaluation) programs, such as wide-angle EO/IR systems; a variety of ground and foliage-penetrating radars; and future development efforts to bring large-aircraft capabilities to small UAVs,” says Dr. David Rockwell, senior analyst, Teal Group Corp. “Tactical and mini/micro/nano-UAVs will continue to offer some of the best electronics opportunities over the next decade.”

The UAV electronics market will grow steadily, with especially fast growth and opportunities continuing in SAR and SIGINT/EW, Rockwell says.

“We’re going to continue to see a strong market for ISR (intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance) platforms, systems, and supporting avionics,” Plucker predicts. “The problem is: That’s a small market. It’s not ‘glass cockpits for everyone,’ but [there is demand for] some targeting systems and ISR data storage, especially in the UAV world.”

“Unmanned vehicle-related DOD procurement planned for next year includes a $271.98 million Army purchase of 34 MQ-1 UAV payloads, an $83.34 million Army project to modify the AAI RQ-7 Shadow UAV, a $79.25 million Air Force plan to modify the MQ-9 UAV with new payloads, and a $682 million project to support the Northrop Grumman MQ-8 Fire Scout unmanned helicopter,” Keller continues.

Level playing field

“As defense austerity has hit, U.S. military UAV spending is coming under pressure. Despite this pressure, there is a shift towards making existing platforms more useful,” Finnegan admits. “That has meant that despite the reductions in the numbers of MQ-9 Reaper and MQ-1C Gray Eagle UAVs that would be purchased in the budget (from a combined 91 in 2012 to 43 in 2013) funds have been shifted toward increased training and ground stations. That means total Predator/Reaper spending


goes from $2.07 billion to $1.91 billion, a relatively small reduction despite significantly fewer platforms acquired.”

“Platform-specific avionics upgrade programs may suffer with coming budget cuts, as opposed to more universal C4I systems, such as UAV full-motion video, processing, analysis, etc. Data links and other systems for multiplatform use will also fare better than things such as internal navigation system upgrades, etc.,” Rockwell notes. “The focus has been transfer funding to ISR, and I see these budgets continuing to grow. Hard-wired military platform avionics will likely see delays to upgrades as UAVs and ISR get what funding increases exist.”

“As pressure is increasing on the military side for UAVs, there is new hope for progress on the commercial side,” Finnegan says. In February, Congress established Sept. 30, 2015 as the deadline for the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to allow full integration of UAVs into the national airspace. “If it moves ahead and no glitches develop, the most immediate benefit will be for manufacturers of small UAVs, such as AeroVironment,” he adds. “The bill requires that UAVs under 55 pounds be allowed to operate within 27 months.”

"Smaller companies can successfully compete against larger players, as AAI Corp., Insitu, General Atomics, and AeroVironment have all shown," Finnegan says. "Now, the prime contractors are buying the successful smaller companies." In the past year, L-3 Communications bought Airborne Technologies, a small UAV developer and manufacturer, and VT Group purchased Evergreen's UAV fee-for-service operations.

As prime contractors and small companies compete in the dynamic UAV market, they are adopting widely different strategies, ranging from outright acquisitions to teaming arrangements and internal development of new UAV systems, Finnegan adds.

Onward & upward

Industry analysts at G2 Solutions in Kirkland, Wa., forecast a combined avionics market of nearly $105 billion for forward fit and retrofit segments of the air transport market through 2020. “Markets will witness a shift toward larger wide-body aircraft deliveries during the forecast period with narrow-body replacements from Airbus and Boeing entering service between 2020 and 2025.”

“Nearly 80 percent of the forward fit market is controlled by three avionics giants: Rockwell Collins, Honeywell, and Thales,” a G2 Solutions analyst explains. “Thales’ market share continues to rise, thanks to record years at Airbus. Rockwell Collins will benefit from the 787, while GE Aviation continues to augment its market footprint with the acquisition of PBN provider NAVERUS.”

Avionics for spacecraft and satellites also hold promise, with China growing aggressively. China is following Soviet Russia with its government-run aerospace market; and, who wants to drive a car produced by the DMV (Department of Motor Vehicles)?” Aboulafia ponders. China is making the same mistakes that Soviet Russia made with state-built vehicles, looking after the local economy rather than thinking and designing globally. China would be better off privatizing its aerospace industry, he says.

Civil rotorcraft is expected to make a strong recovery, achieving a compound annual growth rate of seven percent through 2016, compared to a decline (on the order of negative five percent) in 2010


and 2011, Aboulafia says. The military rotorcraft market segment is expected to maintain a strong plateau.

The business aircraft segment is another bright spot, predicted to log a 9.8 percent compound annual growth rate through 2016, according to Teal Group numbers presented by Aboulafia. Providers of business aircraft, avionics, and avionics service and support are already reporting growth, including contracts and orders signed during the National Business Aviation Association annual meeting and convention.

Avionics for manned and unmanned aircraft will require greater computing capacities, especially given expected growth in data acquisition and analysis via ISR, SIGINT, and EO/IR sensor equipment. Graphics processing units (GPUs) will enable more complex computing algorithms to be deployed at the point of data capture or data collection (e.g., in the field) and at the edge, says Kevin Berce, defense manager at Nvidia in Santa Clara, Calif. “One example is full-motion video captured via unmanned UAVs or other aerial platforms. The amount of data being collected is greater than the ability to push to the ground for processing. The ability to process data at the source, and only pushing down the necessary data to the field, will be enabled by GPUs that dramatically accelerate data analytics in-vehicle.”

“Onboard processing, which is part of the avionics picture, is going to be a big deal,” Plucker adds. “The more that can be done onboard the better, which says the best market is for the players that aren’t usually part of the avionics world—the computer specialists and imaging specialists—working together on avionics.”

RETURN

I3

How robot planes could learn carrier crew hand gesturesResearch into flight-deck hand gestures may help the unmanned X-47B stealth plane take off from and land on aircraft carriers. Just don't flip it off.(C-Net, 15 Mar 12) … Tim Hornyakhttp://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57397085-1/how-robot-planes-could-learn-carrier-crew-hand-gestures/

MIT researchers are trying to get computers to correctly interpret hand signals used by crews aboard aircraft carriers so that robot planes can follow them.

As Northrop Grumman continues to develop its X-47B robot stealth plane, which is aimed at carrier use, Yale Song and colleagues at MIT are working on a machine learning system that could allow autonomous planes to understand crew directions.

In its research presented in the journal ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, the team used a database of abstract representations of 24 gestures often employed by carrier personnel. They trained an algorithm to classify gestures, including posture and hand position, based on what it knew from the database.

As seen in the video below, the algorithm works with a single stereo camera. It analyzes each frame in a sequence and calculates the probability that the movement is part of a certain gesture.


http://news.cnet.com/8301-17938_105-57397085-1/how-robot-planes-could-learn-carrier-crew-hand-gestures/

It does that while keeping tabs on the probabilities for the whole sequence of gestures, and while recognizing gestures continuously.

When tested, the system was able to correctly identify gestures in the training database with 76 percent accuracy, according to MIT.

Song and colleagues are trying to improve the gesture-recognition system by getting it to consider hand and arm position separately, reducing its computational load.

Another aim is to have the system provide feedback about whether it understands the gestures it's considering.

That way, if you did give it the one-finger salute, you would get the appropriate robotic response.

RETURN

I4

U.S. Weapon Manufacturers Feeling the Wrath of Arms-Control Activists(National Defense, 15 Mar 12) … Sandra I. Erwinhttp://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/April/Pages/USWeaponManufacturersFeelingTheWrathofArms-ControlActivists.aspx

U.S. production of air-launched weapons that are widely used by the Air Force and foreign allies might be in jeopardy as a result of a global advocacy campaign that targets manufacturers of military hardware.

Antiwar and arms-control groups over the past decade have homed in on landmines and cluster munitions, and are now also targeting armed drones as another category of weapons that should be banned because they harm and kill civilians.

The manufacturing of one of the U.S. military’s most widely used precision-guided munitions, the Sensor Fuzed Weapon, could be imperiled, industry sources said, because several multinational banks and insurance companies — under pressure from advocacy groups — have decided to no longer do business with producers of weapons that fall under the broad rubric of cluster munitions.

The Sensor Fuzed Weapon, made by Textron Defense Systems, of Wilmington, Mass., is a 1,000-pound dispenser that deploys 10 guided submunitions, each equipped with antitank warheads. The Pentagon, in response to pressure from the arms-control community, has defended the use of SFW on the grounds that its self-deactivating features prevent unintended civilian casualties. Officials have insisted that precision-guided systems such as SFW should not be confused with indiscriminate “dumb” munitions.

As a result of steady efforts by antiwar groups, several munitions suppliers in the United States have seen their lines of credit and insurance coverage pulled back by major financial institutions. International banks that have terminated commercial relationships with cluster munitions and landmine manufacturers include Credit Suisse, BNP, HSBC, Societe Generale and UBS, among others, according to a report by the antiwar group IKV Pax Christi, titled, “Worldwide Investments in Cluster Munitions: a Shared Responsibility.”


http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2012/April/Pages/USWeaponManufacturersFeelingTheWrathofArms-ControlActivists.aspx

These banks’ policies explicitly state that they will not invest in companies that are involved in the production of weapons banned under the U.N. Convention on Cluster Munitions and the U.N. Convention on Antipersonnel Mines.

One of the most forceful lobbying campaigns against banks that do business with weapon manufacturers has been by the Cluster Munition Coalition. On its website, stopexplosiveinvestments.org, the alliance praised the November 2010 announcement by Credit Suisse that it would end investments in producers of landmines and cluster munitions. “Credit Suisse should be commended for this strong new policy that puts civilian lives ahead of profits at all costs,” said Paul Vermeulen, director of Handicap International Switzerland, a CMC member.

Pressuring banks is part of a broader strategy by peace groups to outlaw weapons, said Steven Groves, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy think tank. He said this might create problems for some U.S. companies, as most major banks today are global, multinational organizations. The challenge for manufacturers, and for the Defense Department, is that precision-guided systems that the U.S. military regards as legitimate weapons of war are being lumped with indiscriminate cluster munitions, he said.

“Cluster munitions are designed to split apart during descent, scattering multiple, smaller explosive submunitions across a wide area and striking multiple targets on the ground, such as armored columns, massed infantry, and aircraft parked in the open,” he said. Cluster munitions are categorized as an “area weapon” as opposed to a single warhead, which is a “unitary” weapon.

Low-tech “legacy” cluster munitions can leave unexploded ordnance when the submunitions do not detonate upon impact with the target or the ground. If not removed, they create hazards to civilians for decades after a conflict ends. To address the humanitarian effects of undetonated munitions in 2001 the United States and other nations began to negotiate a protocol to minimize the dangers from explosive remnants of war, Groves said. The U.S. position is that discriminate weapons with self-deactivating mechanisms prevent unexploded ordnance hazards.

In the aftermath of the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas, several European nations began calling for a global treaty to ban cluster munitions. Talks that began in 2007 led to the Convention on Cluster Munitions that met in 2008 in Oslo. The treaty came into effect in August 2010 and has been signed by 68 nations. The United States, Russia, China, Israel, Egypt, India, and Pakistan did not participate in the Oslo talks or sign the agreement.

Israeli use of cluster munitions against Hezbollah forces in Lebanon resulted in widespread international criticism. “Israel was said to have fired significant quantities of cluster munitions — primarily during the last three days of the 34-day war after a U.N. cease fire deal had been agreed to — resulting in almost 1 million unexploded cluster bomblets,” said a Congressional Research Service report.

The Convention on Cluster Munitions does not outlaw self-deactivating cluster munitions such as the SFW, but its use creates a tough dilemma for the Pentagon, as other countries don’t necessarily trust the opinion of the Defense Department, said Kenneth R. Rutherford, director of the Center for International Stabilization and Recovery at James Madison University, in Harrisonburg, Va.

The United States campaigned against the cluster munitions convention and still many U.S. allies, including NATO members, signed on, said Rutherford. The U.S. government strongly believes that it


uses every weapon in its inventory legitimately, he said. This view squares with the government’s premise that the United States must meet unique security responsibilities around the world that other countries don’t have, Rutherford said.

The United States walks a fine line on these issues, he noted. On one hand, it insists it needs to be able to produce and deploy cluster munitions. At the same time, the United States is the world’s top contributor to humanitarian landmine removal and unexploded ordnance clearance efforts. One reason the Defense Department is adamantly against the Oslo treaty is that it worries about the legal implications of working with allies, said Rutherford. “If we are in a joint operation with an ally that signed the treaty, what are the legal effects on our soldiers?”

Campaigns against munitions manufacturers by influential non-governmental organizations such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International can be successful, he said. “But if companies are producing weapons that have legitimate uses, then they should not be as concerned.”

The Obama administration launched a review of landmine and cluster munitions treaties in 2009, but that process has been stalled and is unlikely to move forward during a presidential election year.

“Moral pressure is effective,” Rutherford said.

Another concern for the U.S. military is that malfunctioning cluster munitions could kill or injure American troops. “They could be used as IEDs [improved explosive devices] against us,” said Rutherford.

Variations of cluster munitions exist for use by every combat aircraft in the U.S. inventory, and in some cases constitute up to 50 percent of Army and Marine Corps artillery fire support, said a January 2011 Congressional Research Service report. “U.S. forces simply can not fight by design or by doctrine without holding out at least the possibility of using cluster munitions.”

Cluster bombs have been used in at least 21 states by at least 13 different countries since World War II, the CRS study said. Cluster munitions were used extensively in Southeast Asia by the United States in the 1960s and 1970s, and the International Committee of the Red Cross estimates that in Laos alone, 9 million to 27 million unexploded submunitions remained after the conflict, resulting in more than 10,000 civilian casualties to date. Cluster munitions were used by the Soviets in Afghanistan, by the British in the Falklands, by the U.S.-led coalition in the Gulf War and by the warring factions in Yugoslavia, the study said. In Kosovo and Yugoslavia in 1999, NATO forces dropped 1,765 cluster bombs containing approximately 295,000 submunitions.

From 2001 through 2002, the United States dropped 1,228 cluster bombs containing 248,056 submunitions in Afghanistan before the U.S. government suspended use of cluster munitions in Iraq and Afghanistan in 2003, CRS said. “Confusion over U.S. cluster submunitions (BLU-97/B) that were the same color and size as air-dropped humanitarian food packets played a major role in the U.S. decision to suspend cluster munitions use in Afghanistan.” According to CRS, U.S. and British forces used almost 13,000 cluster munitions containing an estimated 1.8 million to 2 million submunitions during the first three weeks of combat in Iraq in 2003.

In response to calls for eradicating cluster munitions, the Defense Department released a policy statement in July 2008 that affirms its stance that smart munitions such as SFW do not belong in same category of indiscriminate killers as buried landmines or dumb unexploded ordnance.


“Recognizing the need to minimize the unintended harm to civilians and civilian infrastructure associated with unexploded ordnance from cluster munitions, the secretary of defense has approved a new policy on cluster munitions intended to reduce the collateral effects resulting from the use of cluster munitions in pursuit of legitimate military objectives,” said the policy, which was signed by then Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

The policy states that cluster munitions are “legitimate weapons with clear military utility in combat.”

U.S. enemies, the Pentagon’s document said, use civilian shields such as locating a military target on the roof of an occupied building. “The use of unitary weapons could result in more civilian casualties and damage than cluster munitions. ... Blanket elimination of cluster munitions is therefore unacceptable due not only to negative military consequences but also because of potential negative consequences for civilians.”

The Congressional Research Service reported that in May 2008, then-Acting Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs Stephen Mull said the United States relies on cluster munitions “as an important part of our own defense strategy,” and that Washington’s preferred alternative to a ban is “to pursue technological fixes that will make sure that these weapons are no longer viable once the conflict is over.”

The Pentagon’s cluster munitions policy stipulates that by the end of 2018, the Defense Department will no longer use cluster bombs that result in more than 1 percent unexploded ordnance. Any cluster munitions purchased, used or sold by the Defense Department after 2018 must meet this standard.

The Pentagon regards its 2008 policy as a “viable alternative to a complete ban under the Oslo treaty.”

The Sensor Fuzed Weapon falls well within the Pentagon’s 99-percent reliability mandate, said Stephen Greene, spokesman for Textron Inc. The submunition, known as CBU-105/BLU-108, has a 0.4 percent failure rate, which equals to a 99.6 reliability rate, Greene said. “Based on the technical definitions set by the Oslo treaty, the Sensor Fuzed Weapon is not subject to the treaty as its submunition, the BLU-108, weighs 29 kilograms, which is greater than the 20 kilograms or less threshold set by the treaty,” he said. “Even so, we believe that Sensor Fuzed Weapon with its highly reliable sensors and redundant safety mechanisms provides a solution that meets the intent of the Oslo convention — eliminating hazardous unexploded ordnance from the field.”

In the context of the Pentagon’s 2008 policy, Greene noted, SFW is the only area weapon that will be usable after 2018. “It is also the only weapon allowed by Leahy- Feinstein-sponsored legislation restricting the sale or transfer of cluster munitions overseas, again because it exceeds the U.S. 99 percent reliability requirement.” Greene stated that the 99.6 percent reliability rate has been verified by the U.S. government through thousands of tests, and the test results were reported to the U.S. Congress in November 2004.

Groves said it would be up to the Defense Department to determine whether the advocacy campaign to ban cluster munitions ultimately could jeopardize the SFW production line. Textron is a large enough company that losing one product will not put it out of business, Groves said. If Textron were unable to supply weapons, the U.S. government would have to decide how to proceed, he said.


“The banks that have ended relationships with all cluster munitions manufacturers are being shortsighted,” he said. “They are making decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis just like many other businesses. If they see protesters picketing their banks, they might say, ‘We don’t need this.’”

But the idea that ceasing the production of SFW would end the profligate use of cluster munitions is foolish, Groves said. “The Chinese would be happy to supply them. ... And they would not have self- deactivation features,” he said. “Pressure tactics will not work in Beijing.”Militaries buy cluster munitions because they are effective, Groves said. “If one supplier goes away, buyers will go elsewhere.”

Groves believes that similar shame tactics to disrupt the manufacturing of cluster munitions eventually will be used against producers of other weapons and armed drones operated by the U.S. military.

Organizations such as the Cluster Munition Coalition have a long-term goal of disarming the world’s militaries, he said. “They are starting with the least popular weapons like landmines and cluster munitions.” The next phase will be to target incendiary weapons that use white phosphorus and tank rounds that contain depleted uranium, Groves said. “They usually opt for weapons that U.S. and Israel use in armed conflicts.”

Armed drones also are on the activists’ hit list, he said. “The drumbeat on drones has been coming for some time.” But finding legal avenues to ban drones will be much tougher because unmanned aircraft are just vehicles that sometimes carry weapons but also have peaceful purposes. Some humanitarian groups actually have called on the U.S. military to use its drones to drop aid and supplies in Syrian towns that have been under siege from government forces and have no access to food or medicine.

“Unmanned aerial vehicles are very flexible platforms,” said Michael Toscano, president of the Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International. “UAVs are essentially ‘trucks’ that can carry weapons, but also sensors and most serve more benign purposes for both military and civilian applications.”

The former chief scientist of the U.S. Air Force, Werner J.A. Dahm, wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed article that the outrage against unmanned aircraft is misdirected. Drone strikes are directed by people, not machines, he explained. “The military is unlikely to employ fully autonomous lethal strikes. ... The actual launching of a weapon onto a target is one step in a sequential process that the military refers to as the ‘find-fix-track-target-engage-assess’ chain.”

The antiwar women-for-peace group Code Pink has taken up the cause of banning “killer drones.” Their members are known for picketing outside military trade shows and for interrupting congressional hearings. They blame unmanned air strikes for the deaths of thousands of civilians in war zones. Code Pink is planning to host a conference in Washington, D.C., in April, titled, “Drone Summit: Killing and Spying by Remote Control.”

Antiwar groups “don’t like drones because they’re a projection of American power,” Groves said. “But if you ban drones, you’d have to also ban cruise missiles and F-16 fighter aircraft,” as they are all used in air-to-ground strikes. “You start with the most unpopular weapons and you work your way back. You attack the munitions, the depleted uranium, the drones, all the way to tanks and soldiers,” Groves said. “Antiwar activists want to ban war by banning all weapons of war.”


RETURN

I5

Manning lawyer wants court-martial dismissal(AP, 15 Mar 12) … Jessica Greskohttp://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-army-wikileaks-bradley-manning-lawyer-wants-dismissal-court-martial-031512/

FORT MEADE, Md. - An attorney for the soldier charged with leaking hundreds of thousands of pages of classified information asked a military judge Thursday to dismiss the charges against his client, arguing the government bungled the turning over of documents in the case.

The request came during a hearing for Pfc. Bradley Manning at a military courtroom at Fort Meade. Military prosecutors say Manning, a 24-year-old Oklahoma native, downloaded and sent to the anti-secrecy website WikiLeaks hundreds of thousands of sensitive documents and diplomatic cables. The military says Manning indirectly aided al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula by giving information to the WikiLeaks site.

Defense lawyers say Manning was clearly a troubled young soldier whom the Army should never have deployed to Iraq or given access to classified material. They say the leaked material did little or no harm to national security.

On Thursday, military prosecutors and Manning’s attorney David Coombs disagreed about the extent of the government’s obligation to turn over documents in the case before trial. Coombs argued the government has to turn over a broad range of documents, including ones that are classified, but he has not received information he requested. He said he was asking that charges against his client be dismissed because the government has “hopelessly” messed up the document turnover in the nearly two years his client has been incarcerated.

Capt. Ashden Fein, a military prosecutor, told the judge presiding over the case that the government had tried to produce “as much as possible” and that it had complied with the rules. In at least one case, he said, the defense was engaging in a “fishing expedition” for information. And he said classified documents needed to be treated differently.

The government will get a chance to respond to Coombs’ motion before the military judge presiding over the case, Col. Denise Lind, rules on it.

Manning has been charged with 22 counts including aiding the enemy, which could result in life imprisonment.

Military prosecutors say the documents Manning sent to WikiLeaks included nearly 500,000 sensitive battlefield reports from Iraq and Afghanistan, hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables, and a video of a deadly 2007 Army helicopter attack that WikiLeaks shared with the world and dubbed “Collateral Murder.”

Manning is expected to learn during hearings scheduled for Thursday and Friday when his trial will start. He has so far declined to enter a plea to the counts he faces. He also put off choosing whether to be tried by a military jury or judge alone.


http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2012/03/ap-army-wikileaks-bradley-manning-lawyer-wants-dismissal-court-martial-031512/

RETURN

END OF FULL TEXT


content.govdelivery.comcontent.govdelivery.com/.../99238/pa_morning_report_1… · web viewnote...

Documents