October 7, 2019 | International, Aerospace
Christopher Kojm
Finland is coming up on a key decision in 2021: the selection of combat aircraft to replace its existing squadrons of F-18s. The acquisition will be the largest government procurement in Finland's history. Cost will be one factor; capability will be even more important. Yet the most important consideration will be its overall contribution to Finland's security. The decision is not just about buying aircraft, it is also about building partnerships.
Last year Finland solicited aircraft bids, and this year it received them from five manufacturers. The proposed multirole fighters are the Dassault Rafale (France), Eurofighter Typhoon (Great Britain), Saab Gripen (Sweden) and the Lockheed Martin F-35 and Boeing F/A-18 Super Hornet (both from the U.S.). As the Finnish Air Force makes clear, it will aim for “the best comprehensive solution” to meet Finland's needs. It will examine security of supply, life-cycle costs, industrial participation and military capability, and the defense ministry will conduct a security and defense policy assessment. Finland will spend the next year in detailed negotiations with the manufacturers before they submit their final tenders next summer.
Sophisticated companies in a competitive business will make every effort to meet Finland's requirements. It is highly likely that Finland will receive very good offers on excellent aircraft. So how should Finland choose? The country is making a decision about its security for decades to come. On this basis, it should give most careful attention to the offers from the U.S.
Why? For three reasons:
1. Past performance. Finland made a bold move after the collapse of the Soviet Union, deciding for the first time to acquire advanced aircraft from the U.S. This dramatic turn to the West came two years before its decision to join the European Union. Finland's adoption of the F-18 aircraft opened the door to many security partnerships—with the U.S. Air Force, the U.S. writ large and NATO. Finland has conducted numerous operations with NATO and U.S. counterparts, and its defense forces are world-class. As noted by the U.S. Air Force chief of staff after he flew with Finnish F-18 pilots: “Finland is as good as anybody we've flown with; just exceptional quality. . . . What does that equal when we're added together?”
2. Present partnerships. Finland participates in over 60 international military exercises and training events per year on land, at sea and in the air. The most important exercises involve the U.S. and NATO. Given Russia's seizure of Crimea and eastern Ukraine, these exercises send exactly the right message. As Defense Minister Jussi Niinisto notes: “Today, the Finnish Defense Forces are more capable and more interoperable than they have ever been. That makes us effective in looking after our own security and a solid partner for other EU member states and NATO countries.”
3. Future risks. No one can spell out in detail what security challenges Finland will face in the coming decades. Crises can erupt suddenly. But Finland's strategy for managing risk is sound: a rock-solid commitment to territorial defense and domestic resilience, paired with international partnerships. Decisions in support of that strategy should aim at deepening Finland's ties with its most consequential security partner, the U.S. Decisions that would diminish those ties undermine Finland's strategy.
Some will say you cannot trust U.S. President Donald Trump. His words offend. Yet look to America's actions: The previous administration signed a defense cooperation agreement with Finland, and the Trump administration is working with energy to implement it.
Some say U.S. attention will drift. Yet America's global power rests on its network of alliances and partners. The more Russia looms as a threat, the more the U.S. needs its partners. Mutual security interests are driving Finland and the U.S. closer together.
When the chips are down, Finland will provide for its own defense, as it always has. When it looks to partnerships to augment its self-defense and security, it should look first to the U.S.
April 17, 2024 | International, Land
The program, known as the Army Standard Family of Rigid Wall Shelters Phase 1 (ASF-RWS P1), consists of both expandable and non-expandable rigid wall shelters.
March 19, 2024 | International, Land
August 28, 2018 | International, C4ISR
By ROSE L. THAYER AUSTIN, Texas – It could cost between $30 and $50 billion annually for the Army's Futures Command to work towards modernizing the service, Gen. Mark Milley, the Army's chief of staff, said Friday. In Milley's formal remarks during an activation ceremony for the command at its new headquarters in downtown Austin, he said most of the Army is involved in today's military operations. Futures Command instead will think about tomorrow's fight. “The only thing that is more expensive than preventing war is fighting a war,” Milley said. “The only thing more expensive than fighting a war, is fighting and losing a war. This command is all about setting the United States Army up to not only win on the battlefield, but to be decisive and absolutely dominate on the battlefield so that we inflict punishment and destroy the enemy at the least cost to ourselves.” Futures Command hopes to help do that by working with technology companies, startups, academia and businesses of all sizes with ideas on how to modernize the Army and be prepared to fight forces of similar strength. The mission is to provide soldiers with the weapons and equipment they need, when they need them and ensure success on future battlefields – all at a much faster rate than the Defense Department's acquisitions process allows now. Milley said Futures Command would not have been formed if not for Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who announced Friday that he is discontinuing treatment for his brain cancer. The general said he and McCain discussed the challenges of procurement about three years ago as Milley awaited confirmation as chief of staff. “[McCain] said, ‘I want you to think about how you're going to reform the Army',” Milley recalled. “He planted that seed that we had significant challenges.” They continued the dialogue for several months and slowly their talks developed into Futures Command. On Friday, Gen. John “Mike” Murray took the helm of the new command with the support of its highest ranking noncommissioned officer Command Sgt. Maj. Michael Crosby. Together, the men unveiled the command's flag on the 17th floor of an University of Texas System office building. It is the first time that the Army has established a command in the middle of an urban center. The space's still unfinished walls and ceilings showed the work ahead to get the Futures Command operational. With the expectation of employing about 100 soldiers and about 400 civilians, the cost of managing just the headquarters is expected to be about $80 to $100 million, or on par with the other four-star commands. The new command is included in the 2019 National Defense Authorization Act. Milley said Murray has six months to get settled, and another six to start showing results. https://www.stripes.com/news/army-expects-to-spend-up-to-50-billion-a-year-on-futures-command-1.544234