Space communications node offers DARPA model for rapid acquisition

On the same subject

• 

  June 22, 2018 | International, C4ISR

  Top intelligence officials fear U.S. behind in quantum computing, cyber

  By: Justin Lynch The universities and research institutions in the United States focusing on quantum computing are “sub-par,” a top National Security Agency official said June 21. The complaint is among a laundry list of examples, topped by cybersecurity, where American innovation in the intelligence field is struggling, said George Barnes, deputy director at the NSA. “We have to be better at playing the long game,” he said. Barnes added that the Chinese “can play the long game” and “they are taking steps that might not be realized for 20 years.” The warnings, made at the Capitol Hill National Security Forum in Washington, highlighted mistrust between the government and private sector, as well as the structural challenges of supporting innovation. Whether it is quantum computing, space or artificial intelligence, Robert Cardillo, Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency worried that “the moment will be too late” for American innovation. Experts say that when quantum computers are fully operational, they will upend the use of password-protected systems, artificial intelligence and other areas of information technology. “Whoever achieves quantum first, everything they are doing and have been doing is irrelevant,” Rep. Will Hurd, R-Texas, said. He added the United States needs to treat quantum the way it treated the Y2K crisis, where the government “spent billions of dollars and spent a decade preparing ... We need to be the leader.” Hurd said that he supports a recently proposed bill from Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, that aims to “accelerate quantum research and development.” But the intelligence officials at the forum said that the very nature of American government that prioritizes short-term gains may harm innovation. With their centralized five-year plans, China does not have the potential sequesters and fluctuating budgets that are features of the U.S. government. Rob Joyce, the newly installed senior adviser at the NSA, said that government needs to give “more people the license to fail.” He said that while the agency doesn't want to squander taxpayer money, “oversight regulation” does not encourage innovation. Joyce said that the agency needs to boost partnerships with the banking industry, power companies and other areas of critical infrastructure because government has moved to a “support” role. “We are not the finishers now,” Joyce said. Asked what the most important emerging threat was for the NSA, Barnes answered with one word: “Cybersecurity.” “The attack surface is broad and the solution requires government and the public sector together,”Barnes added. Barnes said that that agency is not used to working with the private sector however, and it harms cybersecurity. “Trust is an issue.” https://www.fifthdomain.com/industry/2018/06/21/top-intelligence-officials-fear-us-behind-in-quantum-computing-cyber/

• 

  September 11, 2024 | International, Land

  Ombudsman launches probe of Ottawa's treatment of Afghan-Canadian military advisers | CBC News

  Canada's military ombudsman has launched a review of the Department of National Defence's (DND) treatment of former language and cultural advisers who served alongside Canadian troops in Afghanistan.

• 

  May 20, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

  Study sees British defense sector hurting after Brexit

  By: Martin Banks   BRUSSELS – A report predicts that Brexit will be “more harmful and long-lasting” for the British army and U.K.'s defense sector than for the European Union. The exhaustive study by the Warsaw Institute, a leading European think tank, warns that the U.K.'s exit from the EU means existing arrangements and defense cooperation agreements “will need to be reassessed, completely changing the defense landscape of Europe.” It says, however, that an extension to the current transition period, set to end on Dec. 31, would “mitigate damage” caused by the split. Conversely for the EU side, it suggests that the British departure may have a “healing result,” as both France and Germany will be able to pursue “more comprehensive” defense policies for the remaining member countries. Such moves, it adds, was often blocked by the UK, “which believed that NATO would be sufficient as European peacekeeper.” Publication of the report by the Polish Institute is timely as the 1 July deadline set by both the EU and U.K. for deciding if there will be an extension to the talks is fast approaching. The document paints a largely grim picture for the post-Brexit defense sector, pointing out that companies from across Europe buy or sell parts to various British companies. A no-deal Brexit, which, given the lack of progress in the ongoing trade talks, most analysts currently say is by far the most likely outcome at the end of the year, “would mean price hikes and possible delays in European projects relying on British parts or know-how.” Companies likely to be impacted include industry giants like Airbus and products as “complex and important” for European security as the Eurofighter Typhoon. The independent institute, which specializes in geopolitics and international affairs, notes, “The expected crisis can be averted either by a free trade agreement or, should this option not be possible, a bilateral trade agreement between UK and several if not all EU27 states abolishing tariffs and border checks. “Should these measures not be in place, many projects run by European companies may be hit with delays or even cancellations.” The predicted consequences of Brexit for the British army and U.K.'s defense sector are more harmful and long-lasting than those expected to be felt by the EU. This, the non-profit Institute argues, is because Brexit “will strip the U.K. from valuable training opportunities and will take away some of its international power-projection abilities.” “The U.K. will no longer be able to affect the policies that are agreed upon as the part of the Common Security and Defence Policy," or CSDP. But the “biggest downside” of the divorce will be that fewer resources will be available to make up the future peacekeeping and advisory operations run by the EU worldwide. “There will also be less finances available for these operations coming from the CSDP as there will be less contribution paid towards it.” The third round of talks between the two sides concluded last Friday with little progress being made. The UK government has ruled out an extension to the transition period. David McAllister, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs in the European Parliament, said, “From the very beginning, it was to be expected that the negotiations would not be easy. But we started them from a position of certainty, goodwill, shared interests and purpose.” The German MEP, also chair of the UK Coordination Group in the Parliament, added, “In my opinion, there is still a strong, shared interest of both the EU and the U.K. to sign an ambitious and comprehensive new partnership governing their future relations.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2020/05/19/study-sees-british-defense-sector-hurting-after-brexit