October 18, 2023 | International, Security
European companies cut jobs as economy sputters | Reuters
The highest inflation for decades and the fallout from war in Ukraine have forced companies across Europe into layoffs or hiring freezes.
June 4, 2020 | International, Aerospace
US Should Pull Drones From Missile Control Regime: Mitchell Institute
"I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs," says Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation.
By THERESA HITCHENSon June 03, 2020 at 12:48 PM
WASHINGTON: The Trump administration should unilaterally declare that it will no longer subject drone sales to export control restrictions under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), says a new Mitchell Institute study.
And Congress should use the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) to redefine unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) as aircraft, which not only remove them from MTCR restrictions but also would ease US domestic export controls, asserts the paper, “”Modernizing UAV Export Policy for Effective Coalition Forces,”.
“The US Congress should craft language in the 2021 NDAA that defines UAVs as aircraft, not cruise missiles, but as aircraft, and subject to the same export considerations as any other military aircraft,” said Heather Penny, senior resident fellow at Mitchell and the paper's author, during a webinar today. “We believe that this language, a statute, would be sufficient to be able to remove UAVs from being subject to the MTCR guidelines.”
The 35-nation MTCR agreement requires a “strong presumption of denial” for sales of so-called Category 1 drones — those that can carry a 500 kilogram payload more than 300 kilometers. The Category 1 definition is considered as the minimum capability a missile needs to carry a nuclear warhead. Smaller unmanned aerial vehicles also are covered under MTCR's Category 2 rules, but those export restrictions are less stringent.
Even the treaty-hating Trump administration sees the MTCR — a political agreement rather than a treaty — as a key tool in preventing the proliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles. This is despite its long-standing efforts to ease drone sales to allies, including through revamping US domestic law to allow “Direct Commercial Sales” by companies, rather than requiring all sales to go through the formal Foreign Military Sales process that requires approval by DoD, the State Department and Congress.
Indeed, over the past year the administration tried — and failed — to convince its MTCR partners to revamp the rules to allow drones flying less than 800 kilometers per hour to slip out from under the Category 1 rules, said Penny.
Washington is now expected to try again at the annual MTCR signatories meeting, she said, instead suggesting a 600 kph speed limit as the line of demarcation between the two categories of export restrictions. (The meetings are usually held in the fall, although there has yet to be an announcement of the 2020 dates.)
But, Penny argued, even if this new effort comes to fruition, it would fail to fix the underlying problem of allowing allies to buy high-end US combat drones — and preventing them from fully integrating with US operations. Secondly, she asserted, complying with MTCR rules “distort the market” in favor of Chinese sales, she said, since China is not a member of the MTCR and has few formal restrictions on arms exports.
“Continuing to adhere to and apply MTCR guidelines to UAVs facilitates Chinese strategic interests,” Penny said. “It's working against US interests.”
Keith Webster, former DoD head of defense cooperation, agreed — calling efforts to revise the MTCR as a “Band-Aid” that would soon loose viability because of the rapid pace of technology improvement.
“I wish we would act unilaterally,” he told the Mitchell Institute webinar. “We have the ability to act unilaterally. And I would like to see us do so very soon. I have great hopes that this administration, with its bold unilateral actions on so many fronts, would take unilateral action with this regime on UAVs.”
That doesn't mean, Webster hastened to add, pulling out of MTCR itself. “Stay in the MTCR,” he said. “It served its purpose.”
The experts acknowledged that a unilateral US move to exempt UAVs from MTCR could spur other nations to do the same for their own weapons systems that could exacerbate nuclear proliferation.
Penny stressed that it was key for the US to renew its commitment to nonproliferation of ballistic and cruise missiles, and support MTCR's rules for those systems.
Saying that “we need to be honest with ourselves about the implications” while seeking “creative solutions” to the UAV issue, Webster seemed to suggest that ultimately the US may decide the MTCR itself isn't worth the trade off. “There are challenges with compliance within the regime with at least one member,” he warned.
As Breaking D readers know, US military leaders and Congress have sounded the alarm on the proliferation of cruise missiles by Russia (an MTCR member) and China that can more easily slip through US ballistic missile defense systems. This is especially true for hypersonic missiles, which have speeds above Mach 5 and while visible on radar are extremely hard to target.
On the same subject
-
-
June 20, 2019 | International, Naval
Navy: Next Large Surface Combatant Will Look A Lot Like Zumwalt
By: Ben Werner WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Navy's next large surface combatant will probably look more like the futuristic Zumwalt class of guided-missile destroyers than fleet's current workhorse class of Arleigh Burke destroyers, the program executive officer said. Navy and industry designers are talking about increased payloads, increased computing and increased design flexibility when considering the possible capabilities of the fleet's next large surface combatant, Rear Adm. William Galinis, the Navy's program executive officer for ships, said during the American Society of Naval Engineering's annual Technology, Systems & Ship symposium on Tuesday. Designers also have to consider that the Navy now plans to operate in an increasingly contested environment, which means taking into account how adversaries will see the new ship class on radars. “The signature aspect of it, what does that do to the shaping of deckhouse hull form. I will tell you, not to predispose anything, but I think in the end, you know, it's probably going to look a lot more like a DDG-1000 than a DDG-51 if I had to say so,” Galinis said. “But there's still a lot of work to kind of go do in that area.” Galinis was speaking during the opening keynote address at the 2019 TSS conference. Rear Adm. Lorin Selby, the Navy's chief engineer and deputy commander for ship design at Naval Sea Systems Command, joined Galinis during the keynote. The Navy had planned to buy the first of its new class of large surface combatant in 2023, but Galinis said the Navy has since pushed back the start date. USNI News first reported the Navy now is looking at awarding a contract in Fiscal Year 2025. The current Arleigh Burke-class multi-year contract expires in 2022. By pushing back the production timeline, Galinis said the Navy can refine its requirements now and incorporate feedback from industry and current programs to help improve the ship design and control costs. As an example, Galinis said the Navy continues learning from the DDG-1000 program. The Navy is applying a lot of acquisition and production lessons learned from the Zumwalt class experience to the Columbia-class submarine program, Galinis said. “When you start thinking about large surface combatant, that's going to be a key element of that acquisition strategy,” Galinis said. At the same time, the current emphasis on developing new ships is increasing the demand for ship design expertise, Selby said. He wants to establish a constant design workflow so the Navy doesn't lose talent during the years between ship major designs. “There's a lot of design work across the enterprise,” Selby said. “We really have to work hard to build that talent base back up.” When introducing Galinis and Selby, retired Navy Capt. Richard White, the TSS 2019 committee chair, said Secretary of the Navy Richard V. Spencer had requested that conference attendees not ask questions about aircraft carriers. During his keynote address highlighting recent advances naval ship design, Galinis merely said, “the one new design over the last couple of years is obviously the Ford-class carrier, but we're not going to talk a lot about that over the next couple of days.” During the second day of TSS 2019, White provided clarification to his previous comments regarding the discussion of aircraft carriers. When planning this year's conference, the decision was made to focus on surface ships. There was no direction from the Navy regarding asking about aircraft carriers. “I did not receive any direction from the Secretary of the Navy,” White said. https://news.usni.org/2019/06/19/navy-next-large-surface-combatant-will-look-a-lot-like-zumwalt
-
June 11, 2018 | International, Aerospace
Air Force's New Battle Management System Will Be Based at Robins
By Oriana Pawlyk Robins Air Force Base has been selected to host an elite system that will fuse intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance sensor data from around the world, the Air Force announced Wednesday. The Georgia base, which currently hosts the E-8C Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System aircraft, or JSTARS, will be home to the next-generation Advanced Battle Management System, the service said in a release. "We must adapt our capability to survive in the changed threat environment and move swiftly to advanced battlefield management and surveillance," said Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson. "The critical capabilities at Robins allow us to leverage key expertise and accelerate toward the network needed for contested environments." The ABMS is intended to replace the current JSTARS fleet, which will keep flying until the mid-to-late 2020s. The network, which fuses the data from hundreds of sensors to provide situational awareness for combatant commanders across the globe, will function "as [a] decentralized system that draws on all domains," said Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein. "This is an important step as we move forward with a resilient and survivable network to ensure we are ready to prevail against changing threats," Goldfein said in the release. The network will leverage air and space systems and will include "a fusion center and associated supporting activities," the service said. "In addition, the network will also include some remotely piloted aircraft at Robins with sensors capable of collecting and transmitting information from the battlefield." Officials have said RPAs such as MQ-9 Reaper aircraft would be used to plug into such a network for additional situational awareness. Sens. Johnny Isakson and David Perdue, both Republicans from Georgia, were optimistic but cautious about the announcement Wednesday. They have previously voiced concerns over the Air Force's plan to cancel the JSTARS recapitalization program in favor of the ABMS. "We welcome any and all new missions that the Air Force is willing to bring to Robins, and I will continue to work with the Air Force as the implementation of this plan proceeds," Isakson said in a joint statement with Perdue. "In the meantime, I urge Secretary Wilson to work with us to ensure that there will be no capabilities gap that could put our warfighters at risk during the transition to this new system." Perdue added, "This additional new mission at Robins will be critical to fulfilling President Trump's National Defense Strategy and provides for the new Advanced Battle Management System." Both senators in August said they were "alarmed" to find out earlier that month that the Air Force might pursue "alternative intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms" instead of procuring a JSTARS replacement. The service in 2016 launched a $6.9 billion request for proposal for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase of the upgraded aircraft. It had planned to buy 17 new aircraft. In February, during the Air Force's fiscal 2019 budget rollout briefing, service officials said they were scrapping the initiative. The current JSTARS fleet is capable of developing, detecting, locating and tracking moving targets on the ground. The Air Force on Wednesday said there is no intent to reduce manpower at Robins as it transitions to ABMS. Lawmakers want to ensure there is no capability gap for troops on the ground as the service moves from the E-8C to the ABMS system. In April, the House Armed Services tactical air and land forces subcommittee in its markup to the fiscal 2019 National Defense Authorization Act said it will cap funding for the ABMS program until the Air Force restores the JSTARS recapitalization contract. The HASC passed its version of the fiscal 2019 bill on May 10. But members of the Senate Armed Services Committee have hinted they are open to the Air Force's effort to invest in a more survivable system than the JSTARS, which could be shot down. "There's a recognition in the Senate bill that we don't want to retire aircraft too quickly before a replacement capability arises such that we end up with a gap," an SASC staffer told Defense News on May 30. But "we do not direct them to proceed with the recap out of concerns with survivability, which we share with the department." The Senate is poised to vote on the bill in coming weeks. https://www.military.com/dodbuzz/2018/06/07/air-forces-new-battle-management-system-will-be-based-robins.html