The Pentagon’s Replicator effort to counter China is the right call

This week, Deputy Defense Secretary Kathleen Hicks announced a new and important initiative, named Replicator, which is designed to “field attritable autonomous systems at scale of multiple thousands, in multiple domains, within the next 18-to-24 months.” The initiative is specifically designed to help counter China’s growing military power. Some of those versed in the Pentagon acquisition bureaucracy took to social media following the announcement to express their doubts about the initiative due to the size, scale and timeline. Their concerns are rooted in bureaucratic tradition and an aversion to change — and they couldn’t be more wrong.

This is not the first time in the past few decades that the Pentagon has embarked on an aggressive acquisition initiative to meet a strategic threat. Last month, I had the privilege to meet some of the engineers and workers who assembled and built my mine-resistant, ambush-protected vehicle, or MRAP, that I was issued during the Iraq War in 2008. These vehicles were designed and rapidly manufactured and deployed to the war zones to counter the No. 1 killer of U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan: improvised explosive devices, commonly referred to as roadside bombs, which the Pentagon had declared a weapon of strategic influence.

The team building the MRAPs worked 120-hour weeks during the height of production to meet the demand. If they had delayed even two weeks, I and another dozen soldiers I know personally would not be here today. There are thousands of others who can say the same.

The fielding of MRAPs and electronic warfare equipment was reactionary, as it happened in response to an ongoing conflict. In the case of Replicator, the initiative is proactive and meant to mitigate a growing gap in military capability in order to help deter conflict. This tells us a few things.

The Pentagon as an institution is a creature of habit where change and challenges to established bureaucratic processes can be met by open hostility. I watched this happen when then-Deputy Defense Secretary Ash Carter created the Strategic Capabilities Office. This initiative would not be necessary in the time frame in which it was announced unless the threat of conflict or the need to reestablish deterrence was acute and exceeded the time frame of normal acquisition processes. To put it plainly, the adversary gets a say about when things happen, and China’s timeline for the deployment of military capabilities that will tip the balance of power and erode deterrence is far shorter than our acquisition cycle.

Former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was lampooned for his response to a question posed by a U.S. service member overseas about the need for up-armored vehicles. Rumsfeld said: “You go to war with the Army you have, not the Army you want.” In this case, the Pentagon appears to be trying to get ahead of growing tensions and capability gaps by rapidly fielding systems needed to restore or reinforce deterrence.

This bold initiative is one that should be embraced by each of the armed services. It is a chance to reset the playing field and the clock in the hopes of deterring conflict, which have been eroded over the past decade and a half.

The Russian invasion and subsequent war in Ukraine has shown what autonomous and unmanned systems can do in combat. Much of it has been improvised, and yet produced strategic effects, such as the unmanned naval surface drones that have been used by Ukraine to attack ships in Russia’s Black Sea Fleet headquarters in Sevastopol as well as the Kerch Bridge that serves as the main logistics and resupply corridor for Russian forces in Crimea. That is in addition to all of the UAVs used against targets in both Ukraine and Russia. These technologies will continue to evolve and improve over time.

The United States cannot allow the gap in military capabilities and technologies compared to China to grow and expect strategic deterrence to hold. A significant and rapid investment in attritable unmanned autonomous systems is a good start, and the initiative announced by Deputy Defense Secretary Hicks should be embraced and supported by executive departments and agencies as well as by Capitol Hill.

This initiative is not a panacea for the growing military threat posed by China, but it wasn’t designed to be. More will be needed in order to mitigate the threat and deter conflict, but this is a good place to start. The Department of Defense has risen to the occasion many times in the past. This is another opportunity to do the same and hopefully prevent future conflict in doing so.

Alex Plitsas is a nonresident senior fellow with the N7 Initiative, a partnership between the Atlantic Council think tank and the Jeffrey M. Talpins Foundation. He is also a principal and industry director for aerospace and defense as well as high-tech electronics at Providence Consulting Group.

US OKs military aid to Taiwan usually reserved for sovereign nations

WASHINGTON — The Biden administration has approved the first-ever U.S. military transfer to Taiwan under a program generally reserved for assistance to sovereign, independent states.

The State Department notified Congress of the sale on Wednesday. It said the material would “be used to strengthen Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities through joint and combined defense capability and enhanced maritime domain awareness and maritime security capability.”

The package is modest — only $80 million of what Congress had set aside as a potential $2 billion — but the implications of using the so-called Foreign Military Financing program to provide it will likely infuriate China.

Beijing, which regards Taiwan as a renegade province, has repeatedly not ruled out the use of force to reunite it with the mainland and vociferously protests all U.S. arms sales to the self-governing island.

However, previous arms sales to Taiwan have been approved under other authorities that do not necessarily imply statehood. U.S. officials were quick to say that the provision of FMF funding to Taiwan did not represent a change in policy. It’s a position the Chinese are sure to disagree with.

In explaining the change, two U.S. officials said: “The United States has provided Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to Taiwan for years. FMF simply enables eligible partner nations to purchase U.S. defense articles, services, and training through either FMS or, for a limited number of countries, through the foreign military financing of direct commercial contracts (FMF/DCC) program.” The officials were not authorized to comment publicly and did so on condition of anonymity.

But the language used implied that Taiwan is or could be compared to a “nation” or a “country” — something China has fervently opposed, blocking Taiwan’s full membership in any number of U.N. and other international organizations unless it is identified as part of China.

The only other time the U.S. has provided a non-nation-state with military assistance under FMF was to the African Union, an organization of sovereign states based in Ethiopia, according to American officials.

The notification, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, did not specify what military equipment or systems would be paid for under FMF, which commits U.S. taxpayer dollars to pay for the supply of materiel to foreign countries.

But, it said items that could be covered would include: air and coastal defense systems, armored vehicles, infantry fighting vehicles, drones, ballistic missile and cyber defenses, and advanced communications equipment. It added that protective gear, an array of small, medium and heavy weapons systems, ammunition, armored and infantry fighting vehicles could also be included.

In addition to equipment, FMF may also be used to support training for Taiwanese military forces.

Rep. Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican who chairs the House Foreign Affairs Committee, welcomed the FMF being provided to Taiwan.

“These weapons will not only help Taiwan and protect other democracies in the region, but also strengthen the U.S. deterrence posture and ensure our national security from an increasingly aggressive CCP,” he said in a statement, referring to the Chinese Communist Party.

Aamer Madhani contributed to this report.

Britain has a new defense secretary. What are experts saying?

LONDON — Britain’s has a new defense secretary. The surprise choice for the role, vacated by Ben Wallace, is Energy Secretary Grant Shapps.

The appointment follows Wallace’s announcement earlier this summer that he would stand down after more than four years in the post. He formerly vacated his position Aug. 31 with a letter to Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, carrying a veiled warning against cuts in defense spending.

“I know you agree with me that we must not return to the days where defence was viewed as a discretionary spend by Government and savings were achieved by hollowing out,” he wrote.

This will be Shapps’ fifth senior Cabinet position in a year. As one of Britain’s most experienced ministers, Shapps has held numerous senior positions across government, but nothing involving defense.

Treasury Secretary John Glen was widely tipped as Wallace’s replacement, as was former Defence Secretary Liam Fox, who departed the Defence Ministry in 2011.

Some analysts and politicians have expressed concern about Shapps, arguing he lacks direct knowledge of the complex geopolitical, military and industrial issues critical to the job.

“There is no other way of saying this: Shapps is a bad choice in my view and a potential disaster for U.K. defense, and may well go down as — of all the decisions the current prime minister, Rishi Sunak, has so far made — the worst by a very long mark,” said Howard Wheeldon of the consultancy Wheeldon Strategic Advisory. “Not for the first time, a U.K. prime minister has seemingly appointed a Cabinet minister who will do as he is told.”

Speaking on BBC Radio 4 on Thursday, political journalist Rachel Cunliffe of the New Statesman magazine said the appointment made some sense.

“He is a canny political operator, and he has served under four of the last five conservative prime minister[s]. He is a great survivor. Rishi Sunak has clearly made the decision that he wants someone in that post that he can trust and an ally in his Cabinet, and Grant Shapps fits the bill,” she said.

The Labour Party’s shadow defense secretary, John Healey, congratulated Shapps on his appointment but said a new defense secretary would not change the Conservative Party’s record on defense.

“After 13 years of Tory defense failings, a change at the top will not change this record. On further cuts to the Army, growing concerns over the U.K.’s NATO commitments and billions of pounds being wasted through defense procurement, the defence secretary has serious questions to deal with in the days ahead,” Healey said.

Ben Barry, a senior fellow for land warfare at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank in London, said Wallace will be a tough act to follow.

“He’s been a good defense secretary, getting many tough judgement calls right and securing much-needed additional funds for defense, but not all the previous hollowing out has been reversed, and his successor faces significant challenges,” Barry explained.

“There is unfinished business to attend to for Wallace’s successor. He will need to work on the poor procurement process and growth in equipment costs. If it’s true that the Ajax [armored vehicle] project is on track, this will be welcomed, but new nuclear capabilities appear to have apparently unconstrained growth in costs. Declaring which U.K. forces will be assigned to NATO is also now overdue,” Barry added. “The Ukraine war has exposed the considerable hollowing-out of both combat capability and stockpiles. While some money has been allocated to reverse this, it’s not clear whether that will be sufficient.”

Jon Louth , an independent analyst, said he didn’t expect Shapps to be involved much in shaping the country’s defense sector.

“I don’t think we will hear a great deal from him in relation to defense. He’s more a front-line, general political performer rather than a sharp, focused, details man. His value is his communications skills — able to talk for the government as we go into the next election,” he said.

Lockheed eyes 5G trials following delivery of test bed to Marine Corps

WASHINGTON — Lockheed Martin delivered a 5G test bed to the U.S. Marine Corps in California, with plans to soon begin experimenting with mobile networks in austere environments.

The delivery to Camp Pendleton, the Corps’ largest western expeditionary training ground, marks a step forward for the Open Systems Interoperable and Reconfigurable Infrastructure Solution, or OSIRIS. Lockheed in February 2022 announced it won a $19.3 million contract for the initiative, designed to study and proliferate cutting-edge wireless technology for the military.

“The Lockheed Martin-led team, in close partnership with the U.S. Marine Corps, has proven that quickly evolving 5G commercial technology can be leveraged in near real-time to solve current and emergent mission challenges,” Deon Viergutz, vice president for spectrum convergence, said in a statement.

The company is working on OSIRIS alongside subcontractors Intel Corporation, Radisys Corporation and Rampart Communications.

Fifth-generation wireless tech boasts reduced latency and exponentially faster speed, attributes the Department of Defense considers critical to future planning and communication. The jump in quality from 4G is expected to improve intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance, as well as empower new methods of command and control.

But there are also concerns, including privacy, supply chain security and cost. U.S. adoption has been slow, despite global competition and a desire to box out Chinese influence and vendors like Huawei and ZTE.

Autonomous drones may help Air Force slash aircraft inspection times

Lockheed said advances in wireless tech are “crucial” to the Corps’ expeditionary advanced based operations concept. EABO envisions small units spread across a vast area — like the South China Sea — that are capable of blending in and scattering sensors throughout, allowing a larger force to peer inside. They could also ferry weapons closer to their respective targets and dish out damage.

Such remote or hostile environments pose a serious challenge to connectivity and the ability to relay battlefield insights. Leaning on 5G could help.

“The OSIRIS program is leveraging Lockheed Martin’s experience maturing vendor-interoperable solutions based on open standards, which will enable a wide variety of composable 5G solutions tailored to any mission and platform,” Viergutz said.

The Defense Department in 2020 launched 5G pilots, to the tune of $600 million, at five military installations. The efforts have at least doubled since and have even reached a Department of Energy laboratory in Idaho.

Lockheed is the world’s largest contractor when ranked by defense revenue, according to Defense News “Top 100″ analysis.

GOP defense bill bars Pentagon from enacting Biden’s climate orders

WASHINGTON ― A Republican provision in the House’s fiscal 2024 defense policy bill would block the Defense Department — the world’s largest institutional emitter of fossil fuels — from implementing the president’s seven climate change executive orders, which seek to achieve net-zero emissions in all federal agencies by 2050.

If the House provision blocking their implementation becomes law, the Defense Department — responsible for 1% of U.S. emissions — would likely be unable to disclose emission levels as required under President Joe Biden’s executive actions. But the Pentagon may move ahead with some initiatives it views as necessary to improve combat performance, like vehicle electrification.

David Hart, a George Mason University professor specializing in science and technology policy, called the bill’s language “ignorance by directive” because it would bar emissions disclosures. But, he added, the legislation likely wouldn’t alter much of the department’s behavior since many of the steps it’s taken to comply with Biden’s executive actions “are things [it] wants to do anyway.”

“My hunch is a lot of the activities to comply with the [executive orders] are likely to go on because they’re authorized under other kinds of orders,” Hart told Defense News. “In practice, it may not be a big deal because many of the steps the [Defense Department] is taking to comply with these executive orders are very likely in the interest of the mission as well, like microgrids.”

The House passed 219-210 the FY24 National Defense Authorization Act in July, largely along party lines. Democrats defected because of the climate provision introduced by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and several other partisan amendments that restrict abortion access, medical care for transgender troops and diversity initiatives.

“President Biden’s executive orders have served as the catalyst for massive reforms at the Department of Defense that compromise national security to advance this climate fetish,” Roy said in July ahead of the vote on his amendment. “America’s war machine will literally depend on the wind and the sun.”

Republican leaders allowed votes on the amendments from Roy and others to secure the conservative Freedom Caucus’ support for the defense bill. The House passed Roy’s climate amendment in a 217-216 vote, largely along party lines. Only three Republicans voted against it: Reps. Lori Chavez-DeRemer of Oregon, Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania and Zach Nunn of Iowa.

Roy’s provision barring the Defense Department from complying with Biden’s climate orders would only apply for FY24.

At current greenhouse gas emissions rates, the global average temperature is expected to rise by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius in the coming decades, resulting in more extreme weather events and likely making certain areas of the world uninhabitable, according to the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Military vehicle electrification

The Pentagon has identified climate change as “a critical national security issue” and released a climate strategy in 2021. As part of that goal, the Defense Department aims to transition its roughly 170,000 non-tactical vehicle fleet to run on electricity or alternative fuels by 2030.

For its part, the Army plans to install a microgrid on all its installations by 2035 and field fully electric tactical vehicles by 2050.

Dorothy Robyn, who served as the undersecretary of defense for installations and environment under former President Barack Obama, said the Pentagon has long had an interest in vehicle electrification and microgrid installation to boost operational security.

“They put renewable energy on military bases everywhere because that contributes to the energy resilience of the base,” Robyn, who is now a senior fellow at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, told Defense News. “It really is all about mission.”

She noted that hybrid and electric tactical vehicles tend to perform better and quieter, helping them evade detection.

In pushing back against the Defense Department’s electrification efforts, Republicans have highlighted China’s dominance over the raw materials necessary to manufacture electric vehicles and solar panels.

“Right now, China controls the [electric vehicle] supply chain,” Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, said in an April floor speech. “The communist regime produces about 75% of all lithium-ion batteries that power those electric vehicles.”

The undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, Bill LaPlante, released a nonpublic strategy on lithium-ion batteries in February, aimed at increasing the mining and production needed to produce them within the U.S. and friendly countries.

Additionally, the Pentagon spends more than $2.5 billion annually on energy research and development, with much of that focused on electrification.

House Republicans want to cut $34.8 million in planned research and development funding that the Pentagon requested for FY24 to transition vehicles to hybrid or electric power. The House Appropriations Committee advanced the defense spending bill with that cut in June. That bill would also bar Pentagon funds from implementing a proposed rule requiring defense contractors to disclose greenhouse gas emissions, a requirement under one of Biden’s executive orders.

The defense policy and spending bills in the Democratic-held Senate do not include these climate restrictions, setting up a showdown with House Republicans later this year.

NATO to test 5G capabilities in Latvia with virtual reality, drones

MILAN — NATO’s Allied Command Transformation, in charge of developing the alliance’s digital backbone, has signed an agreement with Latvia that will allow member nations to assess new capabilities at the Baltic country’s 5G military test bed.

The Latvian Ministry of Defense announced this week that it signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the command to use the country’s test site for defense applications. As part of this, the two partners are to hold a second operational experiment in October, at the Ādaži military base, to evaluate the alliance’s newest research-and-development initiatives and the tactical 5G abilities of the site.

“This event will see the use of virtual and augmented reality, unmanned vehicles, sensors, and applications within a tactical 5G bubble,” an ACT news release stated. “ACT will demonstrate how 5G’s ability to provide ultra-reliable and low-latency connections can bring additive capabilities to NATO communication and information systems.”

The Ādaži test bed for next-generation telecommunication networks was built in 2020 and represents the first of its kind in Europe.

An initial five-day operational trial was organized in the country last November by NATO, the Latvian MoD and the Latvian armed forces Enhanced Forward Presence Battlegroup. The event saw augmented and virtual reality software integrated with 5G mobile telecom technologies to optimize how operators grasp technical skills such as remote piloting of military vehicles and receiving assistance from hundreds of kilometers away.

By 2030, the objectives of NATO’s digital transformation plan are to allow the alliance to conduct and transition to multi-domain missions, ensure interoperability across all sectors, enhance situational awareness and facilitate data-driven decisions.

The rising use of 5G in civilian operations has been driving further military applications and highlighting key advantages it can provide to armed forces. Compared with 4G, these include bringing a much higher-speed connectivity to the battlefield, and hence actionable intelligence to soldiers, while also minimizing vulnerabilities with its lower latency.

For some time now, military leaders have stressed the urgency for countries to invest in the technology to avoid falling behind globally. Currently, China is regarded by many experts as having outpaced the U.S. in the wireless 5G network market.

“While the U.S. needs to invest in military modernization to deter China, it also needs to become a big player in the 5G wireless network industry,” commander of U.S. Southern Command, Gen. Laura Richardson, said at a panel hosted by the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington on Aug. 4.

“Information sharing between military allies utilizing a 5G network is absolutely crucial, but what is even more crucial is relying on a network that is completely secure,” she added.

Turkey seeks partners for TF-X fighter program amid fiscal uncertainty

ANKARA, Turkey — The first aircraft of Turkey’s indigenous fighter program, the TF-X, sits in a hangar ahead of its maiden flight at the end of the year. But fiscal problems could stand in the way of its success, according to an analyst, even as the country’s president seeks partners for the program.

The Turkish economy is experiencing high inflation, and the country’s external debt reached nearly $476 billion in March. The international insurance company Allianz Trade reported the stock of total external debt due within the next 12 months has risen to about $250 billion.

“Inevitably, the TF-X program will face financial difficulties in line with the country’s economic situation,” Ozgur Eksi, a defense analyst in Ankara, told Defense News.

However, Turkey is seeking foreign partners, which could lessen its own financial burden in regard to the program.

Turkish Defence Minister Yasar Guler said Aug. 14 Pakistan was about to sign an agreement to participate in the development of the fifth-generation fighter. “Friendly and brotherly countries are also making efforts to become partners in this project. An agreement was signed with Azerbaijan. There are other countries that are also about to sign, like Pakistan,” Guler said.

If Pakistan joins the Turkish program, it would be its second international fighter partnership following a deal with China on the JF-17 built by Pakistan Aeronautical Complex and Chengdu Aircraft Corp.

As for Azerbaijan, the government there signed a protocol with Turkey to explore involvement in the TF-X program.

“With the protocol, it is aimed to determine the working procedures and principles of cooperation with Azerbaijan on joint production issues, including the development activities of the 5th-generation national combat aircraft Kaan, which is being developed for the Turkish Air Force,” according to the Turkish Defence Industry Agency, using the government’s chosen name for the TF-X aircraft.

The agency, otherwise known as SSB, did not reply to Defense News’ questions on the TF-X and specifically Pakistan’s current status in relation to the program.

The Pakistan Air Force declined to comment on the status.

“Getting in foreign partners is like subletting part of your house: You share expenses, but disputes become inevitable and troubleshooting takes much longer than normal,” Eksi said. “Hydrocarbon-rich Azerbaijan has money. Pakistan does not but could transfer know-how. Once combat-proven, the Kaan could be an option for countries without access to Western-made fighter aircraft.”

Eugene Kogan, a defense analyst based in Tbilisi, Georgia, said Azerbaijan appears ready to bring money to the table.

“As for Pakistan, I wonder what exactly it can bring to the table. Not money, obviously. Technological know-how? More questions than answers,” he told Defense News.

Future flight

The government wants to fly the planned aircraft this year, the centennial of the Turkish republic. Turkish Aerospace Industries said the TF-X will fly Dec. 27, 2023.

Under the program, TAI will deliver 20 TF-X Block 10 aircraft to the Air Force in 2028. The company said in March the per-unit price will be $100 million, but noted in May it could be “a little bit higher.” By 2029, TAI plans to produce two TF-X fighters per month, generating an annual revenue of $2.4 billion.

“In all probability, the aircraft will fly for political purposes before critical local elections [in March] but without most systems fitted into it,” a program insider told Defense News on the condition of anonymity, fearing prosecution for discussing the subject. “Most Turks will not know or care if the aircraft is ready for any mission. It will be a piece in [the] government’s showoff.”

Turkey launched the TF-X program in 2009. In October 2016, British firm Rolls-Royce offered a joint production partnership to Turkey with a view to powering planned Turkish platforms and potential sales to third parties. The company’s proposal, which still stands, would see a production unit in Turkey manufacture engines for the TF-X as well as helicopters, tanks and missiles.

In January 2017, the British company BAE Systems and TAI signed a deal worth more than £100 million (U.S. $127 million) to develop the Turkish fighter jet. Presently there are about 30 BAE engineers working at the TAI production unit for the TF-X.

Then in 2022, the Turkish government launched a competition for the local development of a turbofan engine to power the TF-X. Three competitors are in the running: Tusas Engine Industries; TRMotor; and TAEC, a joint venture between Rolls-Royce and Turkish industrial conglomerate Kale, which owns 51% of TAEC.

TAEC has pitched an engine expected to fly the aircraft at a maximum altitude of 40,000 feet and help it reach a speed of up to Mach 1.8.

It’s unclear what TRMotor is offering. The company was founded in 2017 by SSTEK, a subsidiary of SSB. Tusas, which is the parent company of Tusas Engine Industries and Turkish Aerospace Industries, wholly owns TRMotor.

Tusas Engine Industries is developing TEI-TF6000 and TEI-TF10000 engines, referring to them as a prelude to what it will produce for the TF-X. TEI is a government-controlled business founded in 1985 as a joint venture involving the American firm GE Aviation (now GE Aerospace), Turkish Aerospace Industries, the Turkish Aeronautical Association, and the government-owned Turkish Armed Forces Foundation.

SSB plans to build TF-X prototypes using the American-made F110 engine. The General Electric F110 is an afterburning turbofan jet engine produced by GE Aerospace, and it uses the same engine core design as the company’s F101. The engine is also built under license by Tusas Engine Industries.

Turkey wants to use the F110 in serial production, but powering the TF-X with the engine may prove difficult because serial production could require vast amounts of investment and tests. Furthermore, this option would come with the same export license and intellectual property rights as Rolls-Royce’s offer, which the Turkish government dislikes.

Eksi said the government shouldn’t delay its engine choice any longer.

“Every [engine] proposal has advantages and disadvantages. Ankara must make a decision at once before it’s too late to move onto the serial production phase at feasible costs,” he explained.

Ultimately, the TF-X’s export potential is key to the program’s success, Eksi added.

“There are several countries that cannot buy Western-made aircraft for political reasons. Some of those countries also want to avoid Russian- or Chinese-made aircraft, also for political reasons. The Kaan could be what they’re looking for.”

Usman Ansari in Islamabad contributed to this report.

Pentagon to release defense industrial strategy in December

WASHINGTON — The Pentagon is more than a third through preparing a national defense industrial strategy, with the full document set for release in December, according to Halimah Najieb-Locke, the military’s industrial base czar.

The strategy will arrive at a time of increased attention on the defense industry’s capacity. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has shown how taxing a long-term conflict can be, while competition with China demands the Pentagon produce more advanced weapons.

“Across the department, we now have a shift” in approach to the industrial base, said Najieb-Locke, speaking at a conference on defense technology.

The strategy’s goal, she said, is not to change the Pentagon’s buying authorities. Instead, the goal is to better use its existing ones and its relationship to the industrial base. Najieb-Locke, who previously advised the House Armed Services Committee on acquisition reform, said she doesn’t see further reform as necessary.

Since the war in Ukraine began last February, the scarcity of basic munitions, like 155mm artillery rounds, has led military officials to push to bulk up the defense industrial base. The fiscal 2023 defense authorization bill, for example, included $2.7 billion in further munition supply.

In the time leading up to the war, many analysts and officials familiar with the industrial base were concerned about its resilience, said Danielle Miller, who works in the Pentagon’s industrial policy office. But until Russia’s invasion, those concerns were abstract.

“Ukraine … actually takes these concepts and makes them very concrete,” said Miller, speaking with Najieb-Locke at the conference.

The strategy will attempt to fill gaps like those seen with the 155mm rounds. Its goals include a ready workforce, resilient supply chains and fair markets. It will include three phases. The first, focused on development, is already complete, said Najieb-Locke, who called this industrial base strategy as the Pentagon’s first ever.

Other issues of focus include managing sole-source suppliers and ensuring the military has a supply of critical components even as technology advances.

On Monday, speaking at the same conference, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Bill LaPlante listed three causes for the industrial base’s current state. The first is a lack of planning for longer-term conflicts, like the one in Ukraine. The second is the efficient, but inelastic model of just-in-time manufacturing. And the third is the tendency to balance DoD budgets by skimping on munitions, which over time shrunk the market for munitions overall.

Over time, these forces have shaped the industrial base’s size and flexibility, Miller said.

“For many things, you can’t undo 30 years of policy decisions in a one- or two-year time period,” she added. “We’re going to have to have a consistent, committed effort going forward to achieve these.”

The strategy must also chase a moving target. On Monday, Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks announced a plan to field thousands of drones to better counter China’s industrial advantages. While so far short on details, the program is an example of the Pentagon’s rush to keep pace with its main competitor.

“We have to be able to respond in crisis environments that look like Ukraine,” said Miller.

German navy will lead drill to defend the Baltics from the sea

COLOGNE, Germany — The German navy is slated to lead a multinational drill in the Baltic Sea in September meant to help defend NATO members Estonia and Latvia against an attack, presumably from neighboring Russia.

The annual Northern Coasts exercise series has offered Baltic Sea nations a chance to test operations as a combined force since its inception in 2007. With Russia’s attack against Ukraine as the backdrop, planners this year have made clear this year’s iteration was conceived to address the real-world possibility of an attack against NATO on the northeastern flank.

The main exercise area this year, from Sept. 9 to Sept. 23, will be the waters off Estonia and Latvia, leaving only the Baltics’ southernmost nation of Lithuania as a buffer between the exercise action and Russia’s Kaliningrad enclave.

The drill is set to include 3,200 personnel from 14 nations, roughly 30 vessels, submarines and up to 15 aircraft as well as amphibious formations, according to a Germany navy statement. Participants will fall under five task groups — two standing NATO formations in charge of the Baltic Sea, two led by Germany, including one that includes anti-submarine aircraft, and one amphibious task group led by the United States.

A newly established command element based in Rostock, Germany, the German Maritime Forces Staff, will direct the exercise. Officials there hope the experience will help round out any kinks toward the unit’s full operational capability.

The Baltic Sea has strategic significance as a commercial and military bottleneck, with more than 2,500 cargo ships delivering import and exports goods through it daily, according to the German defense ministry. The Baltic Sea route is also the main NATO resupply line to member nations Finland and the Baltics, as the thin strip of land that connects Poland to the Baltic nations, through Belarus to the east and Kaliningrad to the northwest, supports only limited flow and may collapse during conflict.

NATO members have celebrated the accession of Baltic Sea nation Finland to the alliance, plus neighboring Sweden’s pending application, as a chance for a beefier naval posture in the body of water, which is known for its shallow depth.

Russia has its own Baltic Fleet, headquartered in Kaliningrad, with ships routinely observing Western naval exercises in the area from a distance. Moscow last staged its own Baltic naval drills in early August.

Space Force responsive space mission enters ‘hot standby’ phase

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Space Force put its Victus Nox launch and satellite providers on call for a highly anticipated responsive space demonstration, notifying the companies that a 24-hour delivery window could open at any moment.

The Victus Nox mission, Latin for “conquer the night,” will demonstrate the ability to build a satellite, integrate it onto a rocket and place it in orbit on rapid timelines. Satellite manufacturer Millennium Space Systems, a Boeing subsidiary, and the mission’s launch provider Firefly Aerospace have been preparing for the effort since last September. Firefly is under a $17.6 million contract, and Millennium declined to disclose the value of its award.

Now, according to an Aug. 30 statement from Firefly, the companies are in what’s called a “hot standby” phase, which means that sometime within the next six months, the Space Force will request the satellite and rocket be available for launch.

The initial alert will go to Millennium, who will have 60 hours to deliver its satellite to Vandenberg Space Force Base in California, fuel the spacecraft and integrate it onto Firefly’s Alpha rocket’s payload adaptor. Then, 24 hours prior to the mission, the service will call on Firefly to complete its final pre-launch preparations, which includes attaching the payload to its vehicle.

Once on orbit, the company will have two days to make initial contact with the satellite, which will begin performing its space domain awareness mission soon after.

The limited details on timing and the rapid delivery plan are part of the service’s intent for Victus Nox, which aims to mimic as much as possible the operational conditions under which it would use the capability, dubbed Tactically Responsive Space.

The service wants to have an enduring responsive space capability as soon as 2026, which would allow the service to quickly launch satellites into space either to respond to an in-orbit threat or augment a degraded or destroyed system. That could mean having a spare satellite on orbit that could be turned on or maneuvered into position as needed, working with commercial partners to buy data in a crisis or, as in the case of Victus Nox, have a satellite on the ground that’s ready to be launched on demand.

Victus Nox is the Space Force’s second tactically responsive mission. The first flew in 2021 on a Northrop Grumman Pegasus XL rocket. The service is making plans for a third launch, this time working with the Defense Innovation Unit. DIU announced Aug. 24 that the effort, dubbed Victus Haze, would focus on “end-to-end execution using commercial capabilities.”

The agency plans to award contracts for Victus Haze this fall.