Wednesday, December 3, 2014
The new cold war: Putin's forces target U.S. Navy and allies
The new cold war: Putin's forces target U.S. Navy and allies: Russia's military has taken on an aggressive swagger. Highly provocative run-ins are now common with neighbors and NATO nations alike. In the Black Sea, NATO ships like the U.S. destroyer Donald Cook have been buzzed by Russian fighters. Russian Tu-95 Bear bombers have reportedly been tracked near Canada conducting missile strike drills within range of targets in the United States, and Russian airplanes have been tracked as close as 50 miles from the California coast – the closest they've come since the end of the Cold War.
New counterintelligence agency gets first director | Federal Times | federaltimes.com
New counterintelligence agency gets first director | Federal Times | federaltimes.com: The newest agency in the intelligence community is picking up steam.
On Dec. 1, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center got its first director — William Evanina, the current director of the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive. He will head both organizations simultaneously.
The National Counterintelligence and Security Center was officially established on Nov. 21, 2014, by James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, to help integrate the functions of several organizations under the Director of National Intelligence.
The agency is responsible for crafting foreign threat assessments, an annual strategy for counterintelligence operations and a list of investigation and operations priorities for the government. The NCSC also produces in-depth espionage damage assessments and creates counterintelligence training standards.
On Dec. 1, the National Counterintelligence and Security Center got its first director — William Evanina, the current director of the Office of the National Counterintelligence Executive. He will head both organizations simultaneously.
The National Counterintelligence and Security Center was officially established on Nov. 21, 2014, by James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, to help integrate the functions of several organizations under the Director of National Intelligence.
The agency is responsible for crafting foreign threat assessments, an annual strategy for counterintelligence operations and a list of investigation and operations priorities for the government. The NCSC also produces in-depth espionage damage assessments and creates counterintelligence training standards.
U.S. Defense Executives Warn Against Shutting Out Foreign Competitors - Blog
U.S. Defense Executives Warn Against Shutting Out Foreign Competitors - Blog
The Pentagon for decades has been a reliable buyer of
"Made in America" weapons technology. While that should please U.S. companies,
defense CEOs are warning that protectionist policies over time will backfire by
thwarting innovation and by making U.S. companies less competitive in the
cutthroat international arms market.
The U.S. defense industry is in a
fight for its future, and the government is not helping, says former Deputy
Defense Secretary William J. Lynn, currently the CEO of the aerospace and
defense firm Finmeccanica North America.
American industry is shrinking
and many of the technologies the Pentagon wants are not domestically available,
he says. Nonetheless, the Defense Department consistently shows bias against
foreign products, which in turn hinders U.S. companies' access to overseas
markets, Lynn adds.
"You need something of a realignment," he says in an
interview. Today's military-industrial complex consists of a small group of
conglomerates that are coping with declining Pentagon sales, investing less
money in new technology and increasingly depend on the global market for
innovation. A more open market would benefit the Pentagon by spurring
competition and also would help U.S. companies to more easily tap into global
sources of supply, he says.
"We need to have global sourcing. Our export
regulations make that somewhat difficult. And our patterns of behavior make that
even more difficult," Lynn says. "The market has shrunk enough that if you want
to maintain competition you have to look globally. The Defense Department needs
to adapt."
Both the military and the defense industry would benefit from
globalization, Lynn argues in a recent Foreign Affairs article, titled, "The End
of the Military-Industrial Complex." The U.S. military fights alongside allies
in war zones, but the Defense Department "still often ignores technologies and
products made overseas, sometimes at significant cost to the American taxpayer,"
Lynn says. In the 1990s, for instance, the Pentagon sought to develop a new
artillery system, called the Crusader, rather than adapt an existing German
design that met most U.S. requirements. The Defense Department ended up
canceling the program in 2002 when the cost spiraled, "wasting $2 billion and
leaving the U.S. Army to rely on upgrades to a much older artillery model." The
United States, Lynn says, "no longer has to be the source of all advances in
military technology, and in fact, bringing foreign companies into the fold will
help distribute the burden of development costs, as it did with the
F-35."
The Pentagon for decades has been a reliable buyer of
"Made in America" weapons technology. While that should please U.S. companies,
defense CEOs are warning that protectionist policies over time will backfire by
thwarting innovation and by making U.S. companies less competitive in the
cutthroat international arms market.
The U.S. defense industry is in a
fight for its future, and the government is not helping, says former Deputy
Defense Secretary William J. Lynn, currently the CEO of the aerospace and
defense firm Finmeccanica North America.
American industry is shrinking
and many of the technologies the Pentagon wants are not domestically available,
he says. Nonetheless, the Defense Department consistently shows bias against
foreign products, which in turn hinders U.S. companies' access to overseas
markets, Lynn adds.
"You need something of a realignment," he says in an
interview. Today's military-industrial complex consists of a small group of
conglomerates that are coping with declining Pentagon sales, investing less
money in new technology and increasingly depend on the global market for
innovation. A more open market would benefit the Pentagon by spurring
competition and also would help U.S. companies to more easily tap into global
sources of supply, he says.
"We need to have global sourcing. Our export
regulations make that somewhat difficult. And our patterns of behavior make that
even more difficult," Lynn says. "The market has shrunk enough that if you want
to maintain competition you have to look globally. The Defense Department needs
to adapt."
Both the military and the defense industry would benefit from
globalization, Lynn argues in a recent Foreign Affairs article, titled, "The End
of the Military-Industrial Complex." The U.S. military fights alongside allies
in war zones, but the Defense Department "still often ignores technologies and
products made overseas, sometimes at significant cost to the American taxpayer,"
Lynn says. In the 1990s, for instance, the Pentagon sought to develop a new
artillery system, called the Crusader, rather than adapt an existing German
design that met most U.S. requirements. The Defense Department ended up
canceling the program in 2002 when the cost spiraled, "wasting $2 billion and
leaving the U.S. Army to rely on upgrades to a much older artillery model." The
United States, Lynn says, "no longer has to be the source of all advances in
military technology, and in fact, bringing foreign companies into the fold will
help distribute the burden of development costs, as it did with the
F-35."
Orion, Dragons and Dream Chasers: What’s behind modern spaceship design?
Orion, Dragons and Dream Chasers: What’s behind modern spaceship design?: As NASA prepares for the debut test flight of the first spaceship in more than 40 years to carry astronauts beyond Earth, a fleet of privately owned vehicles is in development to take over transportation services to and from orbits closer to home.
Whether heading to the International Space Station, which flies about 260 miles above the planet, or other destinations, the journeys begin with rocket rides that have enough muscle to counteract Earth’s gravity and get their cargo traveling at speeds of at least 17,500 mph to achieve orbit.
Whether heading to the International Space Station, which flies about 260 miles above the planet, or other destinations, the journeys begin with rocket rides that have enough muscle to counteract Earth’s gravity and get their cargo traveling at speeds of at least 17,500 mph to achieve orbit.
For Ash Carter, Bipartisan Support and GOP Warnings of a Bumpy Tenure | Defense News | defensenews.com
For Ash Carter, Bipartisan Support and GOP Warnings of a Bumpy Tenure | Defense News | defensenews.com: Bipartisan support emerged Tuesday for the White House to nominate Ash Carter as defense secretary, but Republican members said he could face a rough road.
Republican and Democratic lawmakers told reporters, amid reports Carter soon will be officially nominated, that the former deputy defense secretary and Pentagon buying chief is eminently qualified for the post.
“He is very, very qualified,” said retiring Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
A list of defense-minded GOP lawmakers echoed Levin’s assessment, including Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., who will be a member of the Republican majority on SASC that would run Carter’s confirmation process.
“I have a lot of respect for Ash Carter,” Ayotte said. “I think he has a strong resume and position. You know, whoever the president nominates is going to face a number of tough questions in the armed services committee.”
Levin believes Carter “would do very, very well in a confirmation hearing.”
Republican and Democratic lawmakers told reporters, amid reports Carter soon will be officially nominated, that the former deputy defense secretary and Pentagon buying chief is eminently qualified for the post.
“He is very, very qualified,” said retiring Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich.
A list of defense-minded GOP lawmakers echoed Levin’s assessment, including Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., who will be a member of the Republican majority on SASC that would run Carter’s confirmation process.
“I have a lot of respect for Ash Carter,” Ayotte said. “I think he has a strong resume and position. You know, whoever the president nominates is going to face a number of tough questions in the armed services committee.”
Levin believes Carter “would do very, very well in a confirmation hearing.”
Likely Pentagon nominee earned stripes quiet way
Likely Pentagon nominee earned stripes quiet way
No household name, Ashton Carter has earned his stripes in the national security trenches the quiet way. For decades he has toiled as a defense thinker and strategist, nuclear expert, three-time Pentagon executive, budget guru and academician.
He never served in the military or in Congress, unlike many defense secretaries, including the man he would replace if President Barack Obama nominates him as Chuck Hagel's successor. But he spent a lot of time with troops during his 2011-2013 stint as deputy defense secretary and has built relationships with an entire generation of military leaders during his years in the Pentagon.
Administration officials said Tuesday that Carter, 60, is expected to be Obama's nominee, putting him in line to take over a far-flung, hard-to-manage department that has had an uneasy relationship with the White House.
Obama spokesman Josh Earnest stopped short of confirming that the president had made a decision, yet praised Carter effusively for serving "very, very ably" at the Pentagon previously and noted he had been easily confirmed by the Senate before.
"This is an indication that he fulfills some of the criteria that we've discussed in the past," Earnest said. "He is somebody who definitely deserves and has demonstrated strong bipartisan support for his previous service in government."
Administration officials said Obama could announce his nominee as early as this week. The officials insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the president's decision-making process publicly.
Carter would likely face a welcoming Senate confirmation hearing, unlike Hagel. As the nominee in February 2013 Hagel was hammered with sometimes sharp questioning that seemed to throw him off balance and raise doubts about his competence. Carter, however, would be tackling a pile of security problems at least as high as those Hagel took on, beginning with the further development of a strategy to degrade and eventually defeat the Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq.
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, a senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said he would support Carter's nomination. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, another Armed Services Committee member, used a speech before Concerned Veterans of America to criticize the Obama administration in general for seeking a fourth defense secretary in six years.
No household name, Ashton Carter has earned his stripes in the national security trenches the quiet way. For decades he has toiled as a defense thinker and strategist, nuclear expert, three-time Pentagon executive, budget guru and academician.
He never served in the military or in Congress, unlike many defense secretaries, including the man he would replace if President Barack Obama nominates him as Chuck Hagel's successor. But he spent a lot of time with troops during his 2011-2013 stint as deputy defense secretary and has built relationships with an entire generation of military leaders during his years in the Pentagon.
Administration officials said Tuesday that Carter, 60, is expected to be Obama's nominee, putting him in line to take over a far-flung, hard-to-manage department that has had an uneasy relationship with the White House.
Obama spokesman Josh Earnest stopped short of confirming that the president had made a decision, yet praised Carter effusively for serving "very, very ably" at the Pentagon previously and noted he had been easily confirmed by the Senate before.
"This is an indication that he fulfills some of the criteria that we've discussed in the past," Earnest said. "He is somebody who definitely deserves and has demonstrated strong bipartisan support for his previous service in government."
Administration officials said Obama could announce his nominee as early as this week. The officials insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the president's decision-making process publicly.
Carter would likely face a welcoming Senate confirmation hearing, unlike Hagel. As the nominee in February 2013 Hagel was hammered with sometimes sharp questioning that seemed to throw him off balance and raise doubts about his competence. Carter, however, would be tackling a pile of security problems at least as high as those Hagel took on, beginning with the further development of a strategy to degrade and eventually defeat the Islamic State militants in Syria and Iraq.
Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, a senior Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said he would support Carter's nomination. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, another Armed Services Committee member, used a speech before Concerned Veterans of America to criticize the Obama administration in general for seeking a fourth defense secretary in six years.
Republican Budget Cuts Threaten NASA's Space Exploration Plans
Republican Budget Cuts Threaten NASA's Space Exploration Plans: NASA's space program is facing budget cuts from a Republican-controlled Congress from January, which will likely have in its sights a controversial plan to redirect an asteroid around the Moon as a stepping stone to a future Mars mission.
"Those who say we've got to go back to the Moon instead of an asteroid, well, show me the money," Bill Nelson, the Democrat who currently chairs the Senate Commerce, Science and Technology subcommittee, told USA Today.
"It may well be that in the next decade we go back to the moon as preparation for going to Mars. But right now, with the money that is being allocated, you've got to do what you can do within the resources that you have."
NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission "plans to launch an ARM robotic spacecraft to rendezvous with, capture and redirect an asteroid mass near the end of this decade," says the agency.
The plan involves astronauts in NASA's Orion spacecraft then exploring the asteroid, with a view to using it as a pit stop on a prospective Mars mission in the 2030s.
USA Today reports that Republican Ted Cruz is likely to replace Nelson as Committee head, and is an outspoken critic of Obama administration projects, of which the ARM is one. Other Republican representatives have called the project "a costly distraction."
"Those who say we've got to go back to the Moon instead of an asteroid, well, show me the money," Bill Nelson, the Democrat who currently chairs the Senate Commerce, Science and Technology subcommittee, told USA Today.
"It may well be that in the next decade we go back to the moon as preparation for going to Mars. But right now, with the money that is being allocated, you've got to do what you can do within the resources that you have."
NASA's Asteroid Redirect Mission "plans to launch an ARM robotic spacecraft to rendezvous with, capture and redirect an asteroid mass near the end of this decade," says the agency.
The plan involves astronauts in NASA's Orion spacecraft then exploring the asteroid, with a view to using it as a pit stop on a prospective Mars mission in the 2030s.
USA Today reports that Republican Ted Cruz is likely to replace Nelson as Committee head, and is an outspoken critic of Obama administration projects, of which the ARM is one. Other Republican representatives have called the project "a costly distraction."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)