Back to news

May 12, 2020 | International, C4ISR

US Risks Losing 5G Standard Setting Battle To China, Experts Say

"We need some coherency around what we're actually doing on the public policy front, and we need some more technical coordination ... so we could at least be at the stage where we're still on the field, versus sitting on the sidelines trying to figure out how to catch up," said Brookings fellow Nicol Turner Lee.

By on May 11, 2020 at 3:46 PM

WASHINGTON: The United States needs to take a stronger role in setting international standards for 5G networks or risk losing the international market to China and undercutting US national security.

Washington is faltering due to a lack of coherent policy on a wide swathe of foundational issues such as spectrum management for 5G usage, network supply chain security, infrastructure development and data sharing, experts say.

As Breaking D readers know, the question of spectrum access is at the heart of DoD's fierce battle to overturn the FCC's approval last month of a plan by Ligado to convert L-band spectrum for satellites to build a terrestrial 5G mobile communications network that DoD and many other US agencies say will jam GPS receivers.

“The US-China competition is essentially about who will control the global information technology infrastructure and standards,” said Frank Rose, a senior fellow at Brookings Institution and former assistant secretary of State for arms control, during a Brooking's webinar on Friday. “I think an argument can be made that in the 21st century, whoever controls the information infrastructure will dominate the world.”

The webinar, called “Global China: Assessing China's technological reach in the world,” was based on a new series of Brookings' papers on topics ranging from Chinese plans for 5G, its progress in developing artificial intelligence (AI) weapons systems to biotechnology.

The panel discussion echoed the concerns raised by a group of powerful Republican senators in an April 14 letter to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette, Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Led by Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe, the senators worried that the Trump administration's moves to blacklist Chinese 5G behemoth Huawei (about which Sydney has written extensively) are in effect pushing the US into international irrelevance as Washington struggles to set a unique domestic path for network development.

Commerce put Huawei on its so-called entity list last May citing national security concerns, and in August expanded its list of related entities subject to restricted US sales. Despite President Donald Trump's wild swings on whether to keep or lift the ban, those restrictions still stand.

“Since Huawei's designation on the Department's Entity List in May 2019, U.S. technology leaders have been constrained from full participation in 5G standards-setting bodies because of uncertainty over whether such participation is prohibited by the Commerce Department's export control regulations. We are deeply concerned about the risks to the U.S. global leadership position in 5G wireless technology as a result of this reduced participation, and the economic and national security implications of any diminished U.S. role in 5G,” the senators wrote.

Such standards bodies include the influential private-sector Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, the widely-recognized International Standards Organisation (ISO) and the UN's International Telecommunication Union (ITU) that sets global standards for spectrum usage. China's Houlin Zhao currently holds the ITU Secretary-General post, and China has been extremely active in ITU work to establish standards for 5G — an issue that the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission raised in its 2018 report to Congress.

To remedy this, the senators called on the White House “to issue regulations as soon as possible confirming that U.S. participation in 5G standards-setting is not restricted by export control regulations.” And according to a May 6 article by Reuters, the Commerce Department is currently figuring out how exactly to do just that. Commerce, however, did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

Nicol Turner Lee, a Brookings fellow specializing in Internet governance issues, told the panel while it was Europe that set the standards for 3G communications technologies, the US learned from losing that battle and so “stepped up” to lead the world in developing the technologies and standards for 4G LTE communication. US leadership on 4G in turn allowed it dominate the information revolution that underpins today's “digital sharing economy,” enabling tech giants Google and disruptive firms such as Uber.

But the US now risks losing the 5G race to China, she argued, which will be at the heart of the next technological revolution. Mobile 5G cellular networks will provide the high speed and low latency (the time between data being broadcast and received by a user) communications capabilities required by the Internet of Things (IoT) and AI, both technologies hotly pursued by the US the Chinese militaries alike.

In her paper, “Navigating the U.S.-China 5G Competition,” Turner Lee explained:

“The United States and China are in a race to deploy fifth-generation, or 5G, wireless networks, and the country that dominates will lead in standard-setting, patents, and the global supply chain. While some analysts suggest that the Chinese government appears to be on a sprint to achieve nationwide 5G, U.S. government leaders and the private sector have been slowed by local and federal bureaucracies, restrictive and outdated regulations, and scarcity of available commercial spectrum.”

The “current national security concerns of Huawei and ZTE, which are integral to the global supply chain for 5G equipment and software” not only are hindering the ability of US tech firms to play a leading role in international standard setting bodies, she said, but also cramping their ability to cooperate with firms in allied nations — leading to US market isolation.

“To date, only five other partners have followed the U.S. lead in banning Huawei equipment in their communications infrastructures: Japan, Taiwan, Vietnam, Australia and New Zealand.25 Other U.S. allies, including France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and the U.K., are moving forward with their deployments with some restrictions,” Turner Lee wrote.

Key to China's success in development of 5G networks has been the use of low- and mid-band radio frequency (RF) spectrum, according to experts, that for reasons of domestic regulation the US has been unable to match.

Meanwhile, the US has been “spectrum stuck” — unable to move rapidly to figure out how different RF user communities — including military and commercial satellite operators and US military radar systems — can share the limited resources.

Low-band spectrum, which includes the 600 megahertz (MHz), 800 MHz, and 900 MHZ bands, can cover longer distances and penetrate through walls of buildings. Mid-band spectrum is in the 2.0 gighertz (GHz) 6 GHz range, works at a higher speed and in some instances provides higher fidelity.

Indeed, the mid-band includes portions of the L-band spectrum, in the 1 GHz to 2 GHz range, at the heart of DoD's battle with the Federal Communications Commission over Ligado. L-band signals, used by GPS, are less likely to be degraded by clouds, fog and rain and can pass through heavy foliage.

DoD, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Department of Transportation — and a wide range of private sector companies ranging from satellite operators to truckers — are convinced that Ligado's planned network will jam GPS receivers.They are supported by a number of powerful members of Congress, including Inhofe and SASC Ranking Member Sen. Jack Reed, as well as the leadership of the House Armed Services Committee.

House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith and Ranking Member Mac Thornberry, together with 20 other members representing both political parties, weighed in last Thursday in a letter to the FCC Commissioners questioning the Ligado decision and expressing concern:

“Section 1698 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2017 prevents the commission from approving commercial terrestrial operations in these bands until 90 days after the commission resolves concerns of widespread harmful interference by such operations to covered GPS devices. We are concerned that your approval of any mitigation efforts not rigorously tested and approved by national security technical experts may be inconsistent with the legislative direction to resolve concerns prior to permitting commercial terrestrial operations. We urge the commission to reconsider and impose additional mitigation steps to address the concerns of these users.”

HASC intends to hold a classified hearing to focus on the issue, including both DoD and the FCC.

However, the Trump administration is divided on the worthiness of Ligado's plan — with the spat pitting Esper and Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao against Pompeo, National Economic Council Director Larry Kudlow, and Attorney General William Barr.

Kudlow, Pompeo and Barr, who all are close Trump political allies, have praised the FCC's decision to approve Ligado's network — along with many in the terrestrial wireless industry — as a move towards helping the US gain primary over China in the 5G race. And the need for the US to move out quickly to establish 5G networks figures prominently in Ligado's various FCC filings.

In a marathon SASC hearing last Wednesday, DoD CIO Dana Deasy and Research and Engineering head Mike Griffin strongly pushed back against that assessment.

Griffin told the SASC that “5G is about capacity, latency, and scale. The Ligado proposal has absolutely nothing to do with latency and scale, and its capacity is on the order of three-and-a-half percent of the total spectrum capacity. Ligado's existence, plus or minus, makes absolutely no difference to the involvement of the US in the so-called 5G race,” he said bluntly.

Deasy chimed in to back up Griffin, telling the SASC that “Ligado does not provide a 5G solution.” He explained that “the band in which Ligado operates is not even part of the FCC's 5G FAST Plan, which is the commission's blueprint for advancing US interest in 5G. The non-continuous bands that Ligado could bring the market are both fragmented and impaired.”

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai last April approved the FAST Plan — for “Facilitate America's Superiority in 5G Technology — to free up some designated low-band, mid-band, and high-band spectrum now assigned to other uses use by 5G networks, as well as some spectrum currently unlicensed. That effort, however, has been complicated by squabbling among various operator communities.

Deasy stressed that DoD “clearly recognizes the huge value of 5G not only for commercial use, but across the US military as well.” And for that reason, he said, DoD not only has a plethora of 5G projects underway, but also has launched a pilot project on how best to share mid-band spectrum being used by DoD radar systems with commercial 5G networks. DoD is partnering on the pilot with the National Spectrum Consortium, he said, which involves government, industry and academia.

“The geopolitical battle is standard setting,” Turner Lee summed up during the Brookings' webinar. “We need some coherency around what we're actually doing on the public policy front, and we need some more technical coordination ... so we could at least be at the stage where we're still on the field, versus sitting on the sidelines trying to figure out how to catch up.”

https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/us-risks-losing-5g-standard-setting-battle-to-china-experts-say

On the same subject

  • Fewer airmen, fewer bombs and delayed F-15s: Goldfein outlines effects of continuing resolution

    November 8, 2019 | International, Aerospace

    Fewer airmen, fewer bombs and delayed F-15s: Goldfein outlines effects of continuing resolution

    By: Stephen Losey With Congress flailing in its attempt to pass a budget and the prospect of a lengthy continuing resolution growing, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Dave Goldfein on Wednesday outlined how bad that would be. A year-long CR, funding the Air Force at fiscal 2019 levels, would cost the service the $11.8 billion increase called for in President Trump's proposed fiscal 2020 budget, Goldfein said at a breakfast hosted by the Air Force Association in Washington. “It's truly damaging for all the services, and certainly the United States Air Force,” Goldfein said. Even if a CR only lasts for six months, the effects would be significant, he said. The Air Force would lose $1.1 billion that would go to Boeing's development and production of new F-15EX fighters, postponing their acquisition and driving up prices, according to a fact sheet Goldfein distributed. It would also force the Air Force to keep flying F-15Cs for longer than it expected, resulting in further cost increases due to the extensive maintenance needed to keep the aging fighters, plagued by structural health issues, in the air. A six-month CR would also hit the Air Force's effort to re-arm. It would reduce munitions procurement by 1,000 tailkits to convert unguided bombs into guided Joint Direct Attack Munitions, as well as cut 99 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles and 665 Small Diameter Bomb II munitions. And that CR would cost the Air Force $188 million intended for improvements to almost one-third of its F-35 fleet. But a year-long CR would be even worse, Goldfein said, hitting airmen directly and limiting the planned 3.1 percent pay raise for troops. It would also scuttle the Air Force's plans to grow its total force end strength by 4,400, he said, which would hurt its efforts to grow vital — and undermanned — career fields such as operations, maintenance, space, cyber, and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance. Efforts to fix the pilot shortfall would take a hit, cutting $123 million from undergraduate flight training, Goldfein said. This would mean contractor instructor pilots would be reduced, a new maintenance training center's opening would be delayed, and trainer fleet maintenance would be delayed. A CR for all of fiscal 2020 would also delay the procurement of the GPS IIIF space vehicle to replace a satellite that has now been orbiting for twice as long as it was designed, which would place the Air Force in a contract breach. It would withhold $466 million in facility sustainment, restoration and modernization funds, as well as Defense Department emergency funding, slowing the efforts to recover from natural disasters at Tyndall and Offutt Air Force bases. In all, a six-month CR would delay the start of 26 new programs, 7 production increases, and eight military construction projects. A year-long resolution would prevent 88 new starts, 14 production increases and 41 military construction projects. F-22 sensor upgrades would also be delayed if a budget is not passed, the Air Force said. But as rocky as the 2020 budget process may be, Goldfein sees even darker days to come. “If you look at the projections of funding in the years ahead, many believe that [2021] may very well be the last really good year of funding," Goldfein said. “It may not be true. But it may go flat after that, or it may start coming down. And so, how do you achieve irreversible momentum if you have one good year left of reasonable resources before a potential downturn?” https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/your-air-force/2019/11/06/fewer-airmen-fewer-bombs-and-delayed-f-15s-goldfein-outlines-effects-of-continuing-resolution/

  • Government watchdog finds 3 issues disrupting US nuclear modernization efforts

    June 20, 2019 | International, Other Defence

    Government watchdog finds 3 issues disrupting US nuclear modernization efforts

    By: Kelsey Reichmann WASHINGTON — The U.S. agency responsible for making explosive materials used in nuclear weapons is facing challenges that could impact the country's planned modernization of its nuclear arsenal, according to a report by the Government Accountability Office. The National Nuclear Security Administration, a semiautonomous agency within the Energy Department, is facing three main challenges, according to the report: a dwindling supply of explosive materials, aging and deteriorating infrastructure, and difficulty in recruiting and training qualified staff. This report comes amid congressional debate over the cost of modernizing the U.S. nuclear arsenal, an effort driven by President Donald Trump. NNSA's supply of materials, which are “highly specialized” with specific chemical and physical characteristics, are in low supply, the report says. Furthermore, the NNSA is lacking the knowledge base to produce the materials, as the recipes to make them were not well-documented, or the processes themselves infrequently practiced, the report notes. Challenges in obtaining materials is not a new issue for the NNSA, the watchdog notes. The agency experienced a similar situation with a material known as “Fogbank,” and the GAO reported in March 2009 that the NNSA lacked the knowledge to manufacture the material — leaving the process for Fogbank “dormant for about 25 years." Fogbank is used in the production of the W76-1, a warhead for the Navy's Trident ballistic missile. Under the Trump administration's plans for a new low-yield nuclear weapon, the U.S. is making a W76-2 variant, which entered production earlier this year. The GAO notes that when the NNSA is actually able to replicate formulas for materials, procuring those materials has proved challenging, given the irregular and small order specifications to contractors. But the GAO identifies aging infrastructure as the greatest risk to the NSSA. “The NNSA 2019 Master Asset Plan states that 40 percent of the explosives infrastructure of NNSA's sites is insufficient to meet mission needs, which can lead to contamination of explosive products or limit the use of facilities,” the report says. It notes that contamination has already occurred from rust falling off rafters and grass blowing through cracks in the walls, contaminating batches of explosives. Aging facilities must receive updates to modern safety standards to protect employees, the GAO says. The Los Alamos High Explosives Chemistry Laboratory, for example, was built in the 1950s and has struggled to adopt to modern instrumentation, according to the report. Facilities also deal with limited storage, the report says, meaning explosives can be stored in a single location where they could potentially cause a chemical reaction. The report also cites NNSA documents that describe challenges in recruiting qualified staff, who often must have a security clearance. For example, Pantex, a contractor hired by the agency, in 2018 estimated it would need 211 full-time staff members. However, in November that year, it reported only 172 full-time employees. Officials with agency contractors told the GAO that the problem is largely due to the competitive industry; in particular, Pantex competes with oil and gas companies in Texas. The company has now expanded its recruitment efforts to include local colleges and universities, the report says. In a written response to the report, the head of the NNSA, Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, said the “GAO's observations and recommendations are consistent with [the Department of Energy]/NNSA's recent efforts to centralize management of energetic material." The Office of Safety, Infrastructure, and Operations previously identified many of the infrastructure data issues presented in the report and developed a series of actions aimed at improving the accuracy of asset data,” she wrote. “These efforts have already resulted in improved data quality, and the accuracy and consistency of data will continue to improve as additional actions are completed.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/the-americas/2019/06/19/government-watchdog-finds-3-issues-disrupting-us-nuclear-modernization-efforts/

  • Contracts for November 8, 2021

    November 10, 2021 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Contracts for November 8, 2021

    Today

All news