News

News release May 7, 2020 – Ottawa – National Defence/Canadian Armed Forces Canadians can trust that, in times of need, their Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) will be there for them. This is especially true right now, as people from coast to coast to coast come together to face the unprecedented challenges caused by the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the CAF is no exception. As active members of our communities, we are proud to be there for our federal, provincial, territorial, municipal and Indigenous partners when needed. Caring for elders and vulnerable people in Long Term Care Facilities As part of the response underway to help Canadians in the context of COVID‑19, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) have been supporting civilian authorities in Quebec since April 20, 2020, and in Ontario since April 28, 2020, as agreed between the provincial and federal governments. Members deployed in Long Term Care Facilities (LTCFs, or CHSLD in Quebec) are working collaboratively with their provincial partners and with medical staff in the homes to maintain staffing levels and help with infection control and prevention. They are providing assistance with the day-to-day operations, helping with the coordination and provision of medical care, and providing general support at the identified facilities. Quebec In Quebec, on April 20th, the Canada Armed Forces were deployed in the originally requested five long-term care facilities following a request for assistance. Following this initial deployment, CAF scaled up to 13 long-term care facilities. And as of today, the 7th of May, the CAF will have over 1020 personnel committed to the support of 20 long-term care facilities in Quebec. Of this number, over 670 medical and support personnel are contributing inside the facilities, while nearly 350 individuals are providing essential day-to-day support, such as delivering personal protective equipment and other needed supplies, maintaining liaison with the Province, as well as planning to refine operations to better support the patients of the long-term care facilities. Additional CAF members will be deployed in the coming days to support Quebec's most vulnerable residents. We expect to have approximately 1350 CAF members dedicated to this task in support of up to 25 facilities when the deployment is complete. As requested by Quebec, the Canadian Armed Forces are currently serving in: Grace Dart Extended Care Centre (Montreal) CHSLD Vigi Reine-Elizabeth (Montreal) Résidence Berthiaume-Du Tremblay (Montreal) CHSLD Vigi Mont-Royal (Ville Mont-Royal) CHSLD Floralies-De-Lasalle (Lasalle) Centre d'hébergement de Saint-Laurent (Saint-Laurent) CHSLD Argyle (Saint-Lambert) CHSLD Benjamin-Victor-Rousselot (Montreal) Manoir de Verdun (Montreal) Centre d'hébergement Yvon-Brunet (Montreal) CHSLD Hôpital Sainte-Anne (Sainte-Anne-de-Bellevue) CHSLD Valéo (Saint-Lambert) CHSLD Villa Val des Arbres (Laval) CHSLD Auclair CHSLD de la Rive CHSLD Eloria-Lepage (Montréal) Centre d'Hébergement Jean-De-La-Lande (Montréal) Centre d'Hébergement Saint-Andrew (Montréal) CHSLD Denis-Benjamin Viger (L'île-Bizard) Le Bellagio (Longueuil) These task-tailored teams have been generated by the CAF from military bases across the country. Before being integrated, members have undergone instruction in how to integrate with health services staff, they have been trained on the use of medical-grade personal protective equipment, and they have also received a mandatory long-term care facility orientation facilitated by Quebec. Ontario Last week, the CAF has started to assist in five Long Term Care Facilities (LTCFs) across the Greater Toronto Area. This was in response to a Request for Assistance from the Province of Ontario. While the exact number of deployed personnel fluctuates, the CAF is employing approximately 265 medical and support personnel. As requested by Ontario, CAF members are now serving in: Orchard Villa (Pickering), Altamont Care Community (Scarborough), Eatonville (Etobicoke), Hawthorne Place (North York), and Holland Christian Homes Grace Manor (Brampton) Conditions at these LTCFs and others across the country are being monitored by the provinces and CAF support may be reassessed as required. The CAF's support to these LTCFs is intended as an interim measure to help Ontario and Quebec get through a critical situation over the short term. Canadian Rangers and the CAF's presence in remote areas The Canadian Rangers are active members of their communities and they are proud to help out during these difficult times. As a result of COVID-19, approximately 1,200 Rangers are employed throughout many communities across Canada. In Quebec, the Canadian Rangers have deployed to Nunavik, Côte-Nord and Basse-Côte-Nord to support these remote communities in their fight against COVID-19. Our Canadian Rangers are making a difference stop and slow the spread of COVID-19, preparing triage points to facilitate the work of healthcare personnel, as well as providing humanitarian assistance to vulnerable populations,. In Northern Saskatchewan, the Canadian Rangers are providing logistical support including wellness checks, transportation and distribution of local supplies to community members. They are also assisting in staffing municipal/community-operated command posts and emergency centres, gathering data and statistics on the COVID-19 relief efforts, and supporting community food security through hunting, gathering and fishing. Some are also assisting community elders by cutting and delivering firewood, hauling and refilling water, and delivering medications and groceries. In British Columbia's Haida Gwaii archipelago, in Yukon, in the Northwest Territories and in Nunavut, the Canadian Rangers are providing logistical support including wellness checks; gathering data and statistics on the current state of the community relative to the COVID-19 relief efforts; and delivering critical goods to people in need including groceries and prescription medications. The work the Rangers are doing on a daily basis provides valuable information to the Government about the on the ground situation in Northern, Indigenous and remote communities across the country. Quotes “We know many Canadians are worried about their loved ones in these facilities. They are concerned about the health and the added stress of the isolation that our parents and grandparents are experiencing. It is why when the women and men of the Canadian Armed Forces are called to serve, they do so. The entire Defence Team has been working hard to support the requests from Ontario and Quebec. To confront the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadians can be assured that the CAF will provide immediate support to health care workers and some of our most vulnerable populations within these facilities. Our country is going through difficult times during an unprecedented health crisis, and I want to salute the efforts of our troops as well as that of all frontline workers dedicated to ensuring the safety of their fellow Canadians.” — The Honourable Harjit S.Sajjan, Minister of National Defence Quick facts The health and safety of our people, and those they are supporting, is our top priority. Each deployment is carefully coordinated with on-site medical personnel. CAF members that will be deployed in these facilities are receiving proper training and medical-grade Personal Protective Equipment to limit their risk of exposure to the COVID-19 virus. As the situation across the country evolves, we will continue to work with civil authorities to make sure that CAF support is available where and when it is needed most — as part of Canada's pandemic response, or in the unfortunate event of a natural disaster. At the same time, the CAF is continuing to participate in international operations, including in NATO allied exercises as part of Operation Reassurance. Following last week's tragic helicopter accident off the coast of Greece, investigation and recovery efforts are ongoing, and recovered remains were repatriated to Canada this week. https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/news/2020/05/update-on-canadian-armed-forces-response-to-covid-19-pandemic.html

Lee Berthiaume The Canadian PressStaff Contact Published Thursday, June 11, 2020 4:20AM EDT OTTAWA -- The Defence Department's top civilian official is touting the importance of continued investments in the Canadian Armed Forces, and says she has received no indications the Liberal government is planning to cut spending because of the COVID-19 crisis. The comments by Defence Department deputy minister Jody Thomas come amid questions about how the Liberal government plans to find the tens of billions of dollars doled out in recent months to support Canadians during the pandemic. The emergency support, estimated at $153 billion at last count, has far surpassed expected government spending and significant belt-tightening is likely after the crisis as Ottawa will start searching for ways to keep the country from drowning in red ink. Military spending was previously slashed in the 1990s as Jean Chretien's Liberal government wrestled with massive deficits while Stephen Harper's Conservative government followed a similar course after the 2008-09 financial crash. That has prompted concerns within defence circles that the pattern will repeat itself after COVID-19, with fears the Liberals will lean heavily on the country's $29-billion defence budget to help get government spending back under control. In an interview with The Canadian Press, Thomas said she had not received any order or direction to slow or cut defence spending and that officials are continuing to work on the planned purchase of new warships, fighter jets and other equipment. "We are not experiencing any slowdowns," she said. "We are continuing very aggressively and ambitiously to continue our plan." That plan is the Liberals' defence strategy, which it released in 2017. Known as Strong, Secure, Engaged (SSE), the strategy promised $553 billion in military spending over 20 years. Much of that is to buy new equipment such as jets and warships. "There has been zero indication from anyone that there would be a cut to the budget," Thomas said, adding Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan "has been very clear of his expectations of us to execute on SSE." She went on to suggest the planned defence spending is actually needed as much now as before the pandemic as the crisis amplifies the already significant global uncertainty that existed before COVID-19. A scan of recent headlines underscores that uncertainty, from U.S. President Donald Trump's administration suggesting it may pull troops from Germany to China imposing its will on Hong Kong and flexing its muscles in the South China Sea. There are also ongoing concerns about Russia and the situation in the Middle East. "Canada has to be equipped," Thomas said. "In a post-COVID world, there is, I would say as the deputy minister of defence, a need for SSE to in fact be done more quickly rather than slow it down or cut the budget." The government last week tabled its latest request for money in Parliament, which included $585 million for the continued construction of two new naval support ships in Vancouver. The first of those ships is due in 2023. Defence analyst David Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute said the Liberals have significantly ramped up military spending, but no one knows how fast the economy will recover or how deep Ottawa will be in the hole when the pandemic ends. "Without knowing more about these things, it's way too early to know what the impact will be to defence," he said. "But it's a basic fact of Canadian federal budgeting that if a government is looking to reduce all federal spending, DND plays a part in that because it spends the most money." And while trimming military spending was the route taken by previous governments, there are implications, as evidenced by the age of Canada's CF-18s and other old equipment and its lack of naval support vessels until the new ones are finished. "Part of the reason we're having issues with procurement today is because of the decisions that were taken before," Perry said. "The reasons they were taken -- rightly or wrongly, I would say largely rightly -- in the 1990s to reduce spending then, we're still dealing with the after-effects of it now because we didn't buy stuff then and we're trying to make up for lost time now." This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 11, 2020. https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/military-spending-needed-more-now-than-ever-top-defence-official-says-1.4979395

By: Usman Ansari ISLAMABAD — The Pakistani government's restrictions on the defense industry are stifling potential and must go, according to the president of the trade body Pakistan Aerospace Council. PAeC is a collective of aerospace, defense and high-tech electronics enterprises that aims to internationally raise the profile of Pakistani industry. Its leader, Haroon Qureshi, heads the defense engineering and electronics company East West Infiniti. In a June 3 post on the PAeC website, Qureshi said Pakistan's private, high-tech manufacturers have the potential to help establish a more ambitious local aviation industry by acting as suppliers to and manufacturers of components and systems used by Western counterparts. However, this is hampered by government restrictions that demand permission prior to even design work. Without these restrictions, Qureshi believes the private sector could “leap-frog, especially with electronics of the future.” Citing the success of private space companies in the United States, Qureshi said if the Pakistani government frees the high-tech private sector to “innovate and do what the private industry thinks is feasible and viable,” those businesses would not use public funds and probably generate income for the government through taxes. In response to PAeC's comments, the Ministry of Defence Production told Defense News the government recognizes and actively promotes the importance of “indigenization and cooperation between the private sector and the defense-related industry.” However, it denied there are stifling constraints on the private sector, saying the market meets both domestic and export demand, but because of “international obligations/treaties, especially the measures taken to counter terrorism, certain limitations have to be observed.” Nevertheless, the ministry added, “measures are under deliberation to further facilitate the private sector in forthcoming defense production policy,” including the creation of a unit for so-called one-window operations — an approach meant to shorten the lengthy bureaucratic process. It also cited recent supplier and vendors exhibitions as well as a defense production seminar to promote cooperation among private businesses. The government is also preparing a “Defence Offset Policy" to encourage the private sector to absorb the “latest defense and dual-purpose technologies,” the ministry said. But author, analyst and former Australian defense attache to Islamabad Brian Cloughley said Qureshi's concern has existed for years, and the government's regulations are driven by security fears. “Whenever private industry wants to get involved in any aspect of defense production, the security people and bureaucrats in the defense system roll out objections, based mainly on the possibility of leakage of technical information and thus jeopardy of ‘national security,' ” he said. “It's been a real headache, and I continue to be surprised that the private sector has continued its efforts for so long.” Despite the government's efforts, Shehzad Ahmed Mir, managing director of the private defense company Bow Systems, remains unconvinced. “While MoDP lives in a self-pleasing, make-believe cocoon devoid of market realities, similar companies created much later in the West are literally thriving financially and technologically today simply because their respective governments gave them subsidies, export incentives, financial support, etc., compared to our government that drowns their ambitions in [no objection certificates], taxation whirlpools, bureaucratic hurdles, etc.,” he said. “So by the time — and if at all — MoDP comes out with any good news for the private sector, there won't be anyone credible around to jubilate on it.” https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2020/06/10/pakistans-private-industry-clashes-with-government-over-regulations/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― The Pentagon is facing billions of dollars in pandemic-related claims, which may force it to dip into modernization and readiness accounts if Congress doesn't backfill the money, the department's top acquisitions official said Wednesday. Testifying at the House Armed Services Committee, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord reaffirmed the Pentagon's commitment to request supplemental appropriations from Congress, beyond its fiscal 2021 budget of $740 billion. It's been seven weeks since Department of Defense officials first publicly disclosed a request was coming; that request is currently sitting with the White House Office of Management and Budget. The defense industry claims are expected to be covered by Section 3610 of the coronavirus relief package, among other provisions, Lord said. To give an idea of the scope, one of the major prime contractors told the DoD it and its suppliers could claim as much as $1 billion. Under Section 3610, the Pentagon and other agencies can reimburse suppliers for expenses to keep workers employed. Under other provisions, contractors can seek reimbursement for leave and DoD-directed purchases of personal protective equipment, cleaning, and costs associated with spacing out workers in factories. “The department does not have the funding to cover these costs,” Lord said, which she later said were “in the lower end” of “double-digit billions of dollars.” Lord affirmed the Defense Department would need Congress to pass supplemental appropriations beyond its fiscal 2021 budget during an exchange with HASC ranking member Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. “Otherwise these contractors are going to have to eat several billion dollars, which could well come at their employees' expense, which this was supposed to help to begin with,” Thornberry noted. “There's a choice there,” Lord said. “Whether we want to eat into readiness and modernization ― and slow down modernization or readiness on an ongoing basis ― or whether we want to remedy the situation in the next six months or so ... and continue to have the ready forces we need for our national security.” Though some House Democrats have expressed reservations about the size of the Pentagon's budget request, HASC Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee Chairman Joe Courtney, D-Conn., expressed support, saying: "The intent of Congress needs to be followed up on with an appropriation.” Courtney called on the DoD to provide Congress the data underlying its request, when the request actually arrives on Capitol Hill, saying it would foster conversation among lawmakers. The Pentagon has rough calculations, but contractors have not yet filed claims, Lord said, because Congress has not drafted an appropriations bill. She speculated the full extent of the issues will emerge over time. “I believe they are concerned that they'll get a one-time shot and want to make sure what the entire situation is,” she said. “We believe we understand the lower end of the number.” https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-industrys-covid-costs-could-tank-dod-modernization-plans/

By: Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — The Army's Improved Turbine Engine Program is facing a “critical” stretch which will determine whether testing on the engine will occur on time or be delayed, thanks to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic, a pair of Army officials said Wednesday. Patrick Mason, the program executive officer for Army aviation, and Brig. Gen. Walter Rugen, the director for future vertical lift inside Army Futures Command, said that the service has finished its component critical design review (CDR) process, and has moved on to its full program CDR, a key milestone before moving into testing. However, “given COVID and all of the factors that have gone on with COVID,” the plan to have the full CDR done during second quarter has been pushed to third quarter, Mason said at an event hosted by the Heritage Foundation. ITEP is “the number one watch item we've had across the future vertical lift portfolio for COVID impacts,” Mason said, because “hardware needs to be coming in the latter part of this year so we can test at the component level, assemble into the engine, and then go to first engine test.” “So that's going to be critical over the next month to two months, to see where we stand on hardware deliveries with that, and then whether or not we will reach first engine test at the time that we had originally stated,” he said, noting the plan is for engine tests to proceed in 2021. Mason also noted that the delay is less dramatic than it may seem, because the original plan for ITEP called for the full CDR to be completed in the fourth quarter of this year; the Army felt it was ahead of schedule enough to shift that target to second quarter, until COVID caused the delay. In other words, CDR being completed in Q3 still means the program is ahead of its original baseline. General Electric Aviation won the $517 million award for the engineering, manufacturing and development phase in February 2019. The requirements included developing a 3,000 shaft horsepower engine that reduces fuel consumption by 25 percent and increases service life by 20 percent compared to the legacy T700 currently used in the Army's AH-64 Apache and UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters. In addition to replacing the engines on those two leacy platforms, ITEP is expected to power the Future Attack Reconnaissance Aircraft, or FARA design. For the heavier future rotorcraft known as the Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft, or FLRAA, the Army is looking at a heavier engine design, although the companies competing for the design will have the ability to pick their own engine designs as part of their pitches. “We really think the efficiencies there with a two engines strategy across all of Army aviation's tactical fleet would be a powerful way to go at both readiness and affordability concerns,” said Rugen. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2020/06/10/the-next-few-months-are-critical-for-the-armys-new-helicopter-engine/

By: David B. Larter , Joe Gould , and Aaron Mehta WASHINGTON — U.S. President Trump ordered a review of the country's requirements for icebreaking capabilities in the Arctic and Antarctic regions, with the goal of getting a fleet in place by 2029, according to a memo released Tuesday. The memo was directed at the Defense, State, Commerce and Homeland Security departments, as well as the Office of Management and Budget. Much of it directs work already in progress — including building a fleet of at least three heavy icebreakers — but says the remaining ships not under contract should be reviewed for what can be done to maximize their utility in the frozen poles. The memo calls for “an assessment of expanded operational capabilities, with estimated associated costs, for both heavy and medium [polar security cutters] not yet contracted for, specifically including the maximum use of any such PSC with respect to its ability to support national security objectives.” That assessment is due in 60 days. Trump's directive to assess the current plan to field an Arctic maritime capability over the next decade is the latest sign that the administration is increasingly concerned about Russian and Chinese activity in the northern region, which could threaten America's interests in crucial chokepoints, such as the Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap. In April 2019, the U.S. Coast Guard announced it had signed a $746 million contract with VT Halter Marine of Pascagoula, Mississippi, for the detailed design and construction of its first polar security cutter — the first of the heavy icebreakers. And with the fiscal 2021 budget submission now before Congress, the Coast Guard says it can fully fund a second polar security cutter, according to a Congressional Research Service report. But the memo calls for a review of what the appropriate mix of ships should be for an Arctic fleet, suggesting that some changes to the three planned medium polar security cutters could be on the table. The memo asks for “use cases in the Arctic that span the full range of national and economic security missions (including the facilitation of resource exploration and exploitation and undersea cable laying and maintenance) that may be executed by a class of medium PSCs, as well as analysis of how these use cases differ with respect to the anticipated use of heavy PSCs for these same activities." “These use cases shall identify the optimal number and type of polar security icebreakers for ensuring a persistent presence in both the Arctic and, as appropriate, the Antarctic regions,” he memo continues. It also raises the possibility of nuclear-powered icebreakers, currently only operated by Russia, which would give the polar security cutter more persistent presence in the Arctic, since it would not need to refuel. The memo also calls for the study to identify two basing locations in the United States for its ice-hardened fleet, as well as two international locations. A study mandated by last year's National Defense Authorization Act mandated that the Defense Department study locations for a port in the Arctic. Furthermore, given that the Coast Guard has a lone operational heavy icebreaker, the 44-year-old Polar Star, the memo calls for the agencies to identify potential vessels that could be leased as a stop-gap measure. The 2029 date set by Trump corresponds with the year that both the Coast Guard's current ice breakers, the medium icebreaker Healy and the heavy icebreaker Polar Star are slated to be out of service. Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan, a forceful advocate on the Senate Armed Services Committee for directing more resources toward the Arctic, said the memo would “add weight” to ongoing efforts to build up America's presence in the Arctic. “Our adversaries are well ahead of the United States when it comes to Arctic infrastructure,” Sullivan said in a statement. “We have one heavy and one medium functioning Polar-class icebreakers, while Russia has more than 50. “I have fought for five years to bring Arctic issues to the forefront, including in the FY19 NDAA to authorize the building of six such icebreakers and my bill, the Strategic Arctic Naval Focus Act, to develop the capabilities and basing locations needed to support persistent presence in the Arctic.” While the president's memo appeared to catch regional observers by surprise, its content lines up with the administration's rhetoric on the region, said Erik Brattberg, director of the Europe Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “The Trump administration has shown a greater interest in Arctic issues in recent years, driven especially by China's growing presence in the region,” Brattberg said. “While America's allies and partners in Northern Europe would welcome a greater U.S. presence in the Arctic, they are also wary of the region becoming increasingly marked by zero-sum, great power competition between the U.S., Russia and China.” Leasing icebreakers If the U.S. were to lease icebreakers for missions such as the annual breaking out of the National Science Foundation's research facility in Antarctica, McMurdo Station, three nations seem most likely to be able to fill the niche: Canada, Finland and Sweden. All three have rare excess icebreaker capacity, and all three would likely welcome the business. Finland, whose industry claims to have “designed about 80 percent of the world's icebreakers” and produced “about 60 percent” of the world's fleet, has hoped to break into the American market for years. The leasing opportunity could provide a foothold for Helsinki, although issues may arise with the U.S. Jones Act that may complicate the act of America outright buying a Finnish-made icebreaker. The law is meant to provide stability to the U.S. maritime industry by supporting domestic business. “The White House announcement will likely be music in the ears of Finland, which has been trying to sell or lease icebreakers to the U.S. for years,” Brattberg said. It is also possible that Sweden and Finland — two European Union, non-NATO states that have close relations — could try to create some form of joint offering for America's needs. The U.S. has leased icebreakers for the McMurdo mission from Sweden and Russia as late as 2012 — just prior to the souring of relations between the West and Russia over the latter's annexation of Crimea. But such an arrangement often limits how the vessel can be used under the terms of the lease. In 2017, a study by the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine mandated by Congress the year before, concluded that leasing icebreakers was not a viable path for the Coast Guard. “Chartering (an operating lease) is not a viable option,” the study found. “The availability of polar icebreakers on the open market is extremely limited. (The committee is aware of the sale of only one heavy icebreaker since 2010.) U.S. experience with chartering a polar icebreaker for the McMurdo resupply mission has been problematic on two prior charter attempts. “Chartering is workable only if the need is short term and mission specific. The committee notes that chartering may preclude USCG from performing its multiple missions.” In the Coast Guard's own 2019 environmental impact study for the Polar Security Cutter program, the service concluded that there were no vessels available to lease that would “substantially meet” the operational requirement for its icebreaking needs. Furthermore, any lease would need to be such that the Coast Guard provide the manning, training and equipping of the vessel — assuming all the costs — while still paying for the privilege of having it, making such an arrangement a financially dubious prospect. Frozen flashpoint The White House's decree comes in the context of a larger refocusing of national attention to the Arctic, as warming waters and melting ice open more time-efficient shipping routes and give nations greater access to natural resources that may have once been cost-prohibitive to reach. Russia in particular has made clear to the international community that it has core economic interests there and will defend them, even building icebreakers with cruise missiles and deck guns to patrol frozen waters. The country, with 7,000 miles of Arctic coast, sees the region as both a security liability and a key to its long-term economic success. President Vladimir Putin in 2017 put estimates of the mineral wealth in the region at $30 trillion. In a February hearing before the congressional Transportation and Maritime Security Subcommittee, the State Department's deputy assistant secretary for European and Eurasian affairs, Michael Murphy, testified that Russia's military buildup in the Arctic threatens the United States' and NATO's northern flank. Although Russia has cooperated on oil spill response and search-and-rescue missions, the U.S. views the country's moves with suspicion, especially in the establishment of an Arctic base and the installation of coastal missile batteries, early warning radars and air defenses, Murphy said in testimony. “The Russian military buildup in the Arctic has implications beyond its waters,” he said. “From a geostrategic perspective, the Arctic and the North Atlantic are inextricably linked. The Arctic provides Russian ships and submarines with access to a critical naval chokepoint: the GIUK gap that plays an outsized role in NATO's defense and deterrence strategy. Underwater trans-Atlantic cables also run through this area." “In short, NATO's northern flank must once again command the attention of the United States and its allies,” he added. Similar to its concerns for freedom of navigation in the South China Sea, which has become a flashpoint in Sino-U.S. relations, the U.S. is taking issue with Russia's attempt to force shippers to use Russian pilots and pay for use of the Northern Sea Route, which runs through Russia's exclusive economic zone. Russia has heavily invested in icebreakers to keep the Northern Sea Route open for as long as possible each year, and therefore the country views it as something of a toll road. “Russia's restrictions on the freedom of navigation in the Northern Sea Route are inconsistent with international law,” Murphy said. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/09/trump-memo-demands-new-fleet-of-arctic-icebreakers-to-be-ready-by-2029/

By: Joe Gould WASHINGTON ― A key House Democrat will propose a billion-dollar pandemic response and preparedness fund in the annual defense policy bill, Defense News has learned. The bill would help boost production of key medical equipment sought by states amid the country's fight against the coronavirus pandemic. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Wash., will include the measure in his committee's version of the 2021 National Defense Authorization Act as a means to strengthen the Department of Defense and the country's ability to respond to a potential COVID-19 resurgence and other future infectious diseases, according to a House aide familiar with the proposal. The proposal comes as Smith and other Democrats have criticized President Donald Trump as neither sufficiently marshaling American industry to produce medical equipment like swabs, masks and ventilators, nor coordinating with states on their needs. Still, Trump has partially invoked the Defense Production Act, and the Pentagon has had a central role awarding millions of dollars in contracts to address shortages for these items. “Looking forward, I intend to include in this year's National Defense Authorization Act an effort to proactively look beyond the response to COVID-19 and increase preparedness and resilience for future pandemics,” Smith said in prepared remarks for Wednesday's HASC hearing on the DoD's efforts to mitigate the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. The U.S. military, Smith said, “has a unique ability to lead” in efforts to ramp up domestic production of key equipment, “given its experience in acquisition and stockpile management that has already been a deep resource to the federal government response.” At that hearing, Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment Ellen Lord is expected to testify that the DoD's Joint Acquisition Task Force has executed $284 million of a planned $312 million for medical resources ― and that there have been challenges in reducing America's dependence on overseas suppliers. “Reconstituting domestic production or creating new production that shifted offshore years ago often requires capital equipment expenditures, retooling, and re-training of the workforce,” Lord said in her prepared testimony. “It can be months before a supplier is fully capable of producing components or end-items at scale, and these timelines are taken into account when reviewing projects to ensure production increases align to prospective needs of medical items.” Major elements of Smith's proposal will aim to strengthen the small business supply chain for essential gear like personal protective equipment; improve the DoD's ability to rapidly acquire and manufacture response supplies using the organic industrial base; and increase DoD research funding for infectious disease detection, treatment and response technologies. Details of the proposal are expected to be released publicly with the bill in late June. The billion dollars for the fund would come from unspecified, “lower priority accounts” in the NDAA, the aide familiar with the proposal told Defense News. (The House and Senate are each expected to propose a $740 billion bill, in line with the most recent bipartisan budget agreement.) “The monies in this fund were identified through routine reviews of [the president's fiscal 2021] budget requests. The COVID crisis has made clear the need for a more aggressive effort to prepare for and enhance resilience in the face of future pandemics,” the aide said. “The approximate $1 billion is less than one-seventh of a percent of the overall DoD budget [request].” If passed into law, the legislation would seem to hand the Defense Department a mission of supporting domestic health care, which falls outside of its traditional responsibilities, said Todd Harrison, a defense budget analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It's not been a core area for DoD, but the reason people tend to turn to DoD in times like this is the military has the manpower and logistics infrastructure to mobilize and bring a lot of people to a problem very quickly: Do contact tracing, do testing, set up field hospitals,” Harrison said. “Plus, the NDAA is a must-pass piece of legislation every single year, so if you want something funded, you put it in and it will at least get a vote.” The Trump administration has been criticized for a delayed response to the outbreak and a lack of organization in providing tests and medical supplies. Smith, who steers the House version of the NDAA, has telegraphed for weeks that he might pursue action. He has already sent Trump a letter, signed by himself as well as House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J., and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., calling for a clear federal strategy to procure medical supplies and the aggregation of the country's needs. “100,000 deaths in the U.S. from #COVID19,” Smith said in a May 27 tweet. “Yet we still do not have an adequate national testing plan. We are still failing to use the full force of the Defense Production Act to produce the supplies we need.” On July 1, HASC is expected to mark up its version of the NDAA. The Senate Armed Services Committee this week began closed-door consideration of its version of the NDAA, which is typically reconciled with the House's bill. Because the NDAA is the authorization bill, Congress would have to follow suit in appropriations bills for Smith's forthcoming pandemic response and preparedness proposal to receive funding. https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2020/06/10/defense-bill-to-include-billion-dollars-for-pandemic-response-and-preparedness/

By: Laicie Heeley As the host of a national security podcast literally named “Things That Go Boom,” I spend a lot of my time thinking about what keeps us safe. And usually these thoughts are pretty focused on big, obvious threats — things like bombs. But with the world seemingly imploding, a global pandemic spreading, nationwide protests against police brutality erupting and world economies tanking, it's clearer than ever that we've been preparing for the wrong crisis. You could say we were preparing for World War III, when we got hammered by World War C. Staying safe means recognizing what threats we're facing — the ones we're expecting and the ones that might catch us off guard. But we didn't do that. Instead we invested hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and wars while the coronavirus slipped silently and invisibly across our borders, into our homes and even onto our military aircraft carriers. The greatest threats of the past decade have come in the form of a deadly virus, climate-related natural disasters, economic meltdowns, and attacks on free and fair elections. So why are expensive weapons systems and massive military installations still a foregone conclusion? America spends over $700 billion a year on our national defense. That's about a sixth of our overall budget and more than health care, education and all the rest of our discretionary spending combined. And the money is solid, meaning that most of the time, it's not subject to normal swings in the economy. Things are bad? We can't let the military feel the pain. Things are good? The military has to prepare for the next big threat. Bad or good, it's always a great time to invest. You can't put a price tag on security, they say. And they don't. According to the Watson Institute's Costs of War Project, America's war on terror — which now spans more than 80 countries — has cost taxpayers over $6 trillion since 2001, with no signs of slowing down. And in its latest budget proposal, the Trump administration proposed spending $20 billion more on military programs than on all other federal programs combined. Conversely, in 2018, the Trump administration cut the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's budget by 80 percent, forcing it to scale back its efforts to prevent epidemics in 39 of 49 countries, including China. These and other major cuts to global health spending left the U.S. unprepared for the crisis we're facing now. As vital American businesses — from my son's preschool to our friends' farm — struggle to survive, the defense industry has unsurprisingly had no such problem. In late April, for example, some contractors received a windfall of business when the State Department approved over $2 billion in weapons sales to repressive regimes like India, Morocco and the Philippines, with more supposedly on the way. The defense industry is doing so well in fact that it is showing up on investment lists as an example of one of the best places to “hedge in hard times.” Despite their already deep financial pockets, Congress decided to give these huge contractors billions of dollars in coronavirus relief funds. This comes as a bit of a surprise when you consider that the Pentagon just recently diverted $13.3 billion in unused funds for the construction of the president's border wall. And the first-ever audit of the Department of Defense revealed that it failed to spend almost $28 billion from 2013-2018, all the while asking for more funding. Unfortunately, experts believe this money, which is supposed to be used to help keep workers safe and employed, will instead only help make the companies' executives richer. We're already seeing this play out. Deemed “essential workers” due to the pending arms sales, workers in these manufacturing plants recently went on strike after they were forced to go to work even as a number of their colleagues tested positive for coronavirus. Flush with additional resources from a growing military budget, and as other departments' budgets have been cut, the Pentagon has also become deeply embedded in domestic affairs. Last year, Defense Secretary Mark Esper went so far as to proclaim election security a core part of the Pentagon's mission, despite the hesitance of past officials to allow such forms of military creep. The separation of the civilian and the military is one of the hallmarks of our democracy. The breakdown of these norms isn't good for our country, and it isn't good for the Pentagon, which has already sounded the alarm on what the military can — and cannot — do to deal with the pandemic. What's more, the migration of funds to the Pentagon saps other agencies of vital and limited resources. By many accounts, it also makes us worse at winning wars, as the Pentagon foregoes more focused and essential strategic planning in favor of a do-it-all, buy-it-all reality. Consider that some estimates put the annual cost of eradicating homelessness in the United States at about $20 billion, and the cost of eradicating hunger in America at about $26 billion. And consider, in the midst of an outbreak, that we could buy 2,200 ventilators for the price of one F-35. It doesn't have to be this way. While some may see the Pentagon budget as a sacred cow, it's not. Reconsidering our spending to invest more heavily in the programs that really keep us safe is not only possible, but long overdue. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/06/10/we-prepared-for-war-but-should-have-spent-our-money-elsewhere/

Nathan Strout For a little more than one year, Brig. Gen. Rob Collins served as the program executive officer for Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors (IEW&S), where he was responsible for ensuring the soldier can detect, recognize and identify the enemy. Collins' vast portfolio included airborne and terrestrial sensors, position, navigation and timing devices, biometric solutions, and the TITAN ground station program, which will take data from aerial, terrestrial and space sensors to distribute essential data to shooters. The officer has a long career working in this arena: he previously served as project manager for the Army's Distributed Common Ground System and before that as product manager for the Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T) Increments 2 and 3. On June 1, Collins officially took over as the new head of the Army's Program Executive Office – Command, Control and Communications (Tactical) where he will oversee the Army's network modernization efforts and work with the network cross functional team at Army Futures Command. In May, during his final days at PEO IEW&S, Collins talked to C4ISRNET's Nathan Strout about his approach to acquisitions, how the Army fits into Joint All Domain Command and Control, and the legacy he'll leave at the program office. This interview has been edited for clarity and length. C4ISRNET: How has your office helped the Department of Defense's shape its approach to Joint All Domain Command and Control? COLLINS: Enhancing deep sense and linking sensor to shooter is fundamental to our Army multi-domain operations concept, and really, the future of large-scale ground combat operations. And specifically for our PEO, we've been active partners in JADC2 efforts, working closely with our network (cross functional team) and our PEO C3T partners and the Assured Position Navigation and Timing cross functional-team in particular and the ISR task force at large, which is led by the G2. We're working on integrated architectures, multi-functional sensors that are integrated within the network for both [data] transport and mission command, and really solutions that are tailored to meet the unique requirements of our Army ground force. And when I say that, [I meant that they are] really at scale and they can meet the mobility requirements of our ground force. We operate at a scale and at an expeditionary mobile fashion which makes the Army a little bit unique. I'll tell you the collaborations that we've embarked upon with the [program officers] really assisted in some common design principles and components to assist in interoperability and really enabling sensor to shooter. Most recently within the PEO, we really helped the Army with some deep sensing ground stations — TITAN circuits if you will — that participated in some sensor to shooter threads in a training exercise [outside the continental United States]. So that really informed our approach. Across the PEO moving forward we've identified a lot of collaborative areas for experimentation demonstrations, tech maturity and really focused in on sensor integration and really data — how do we share data best across the battlefield? C4ISRNET: From the outside, it seems like TITAN will be an essential piece to the entire JADC2 concept, especially for the Army. How are you approaching redundancy and survivability to that system? COLLINS: TITAN is certainly a significant focus area in the modernization effort. It's a key component for our deep sense capability and really being scalable and expeditionary as an intelligence ground station and supporting commanders across the multi-domain operations battlefield framework. And we're really looking at TITAN to be kind of a LEGO approach that can be tailored based on the echelon it supports. And yes, one of the tenets is that it's going to leverage a multi-layered approach, a robust set of nodes from space, from high-altitude aerial to terrestrial sensors and assist with target nominations and link fires, command and control, informed by all the multi-disciplines of intelligence. And really as it connects all these various feeds, hundreds of thousands of intelligence feeds, it's going to employ artificial intelligence and machine learning to rapidly synthesize that information into meaningful info at the speed of battle —sometimes what we say is time can almost become a weapon in and by itself. Part of the analysis is taking a look at primary and alternate communications, what we call PACE, as part of the design, and I'll tell you TITAN is going to consist of a number of assured communications capabilities designed in the PACE plan, from Beyond Line-of-Sight communications, common tactical network components, direct downlinks, software-defined radios, and other IT and non-IP options that really span the gambit of the security domain. So we understand the criticality of PACE and it's one of these that we'll work closely with our network and APNT CFT partners as we continue to refine and define the concept. C4ISRNET: Speaking more broadly, a key function of JADC2 is being able to network with the other services and pull in their information to your shooters. When you look to the other services, what are the platforms, networks, or developments that you're excited to see feed into TITAN and other Army systems? COLLINS: We're always looking for opportunities to leverage national and other mission partner information, and that can span a number of sense capabilities, certainly within space. We certainly watch all things that are going on within low Earth orbit, capabilities that will provide a lot of opportunity. Across the joint force there are a number of areas — certainly within the Air Force — that have the ability to do deep sense with aerial platforms at altitude, so we watch that closely. And I would just tell you, even in the commercial arena even as far as the geospatial information there is a lot of collect capability. TITAN is really adopting an open systems architecture kind of baked in from the beginning [where it can take data from multiple sources], whether it's a [science and technology] effort — which could come from the Army or another agency — for intelligence warning capability or detect/assess/decide-type capability, or if it's leveraging a mission or national partner capability as I mentioned for deep sense, or really even adopting a commercial capability like geospatial collect or adopting a high performance data platform. C4ISRNET: Leaders at the Space Development Agency frequently note that the Army is the biggest customers for data collected from space. Can you speak a little bit about how you're looking at their architecture and tying into their transport layer? COLLINS: At least on the ISR side, we work closely with many of our partners as we look at opportunities to be able to leverage investments that they're making into the space sense capability, and certainly some of the things we have to be conscious of are the responsiveness to our tactical command. If they have intelligence requirements [we need to be able] to provide those back so we can get the persistent stare or the on demand access that we need for the tactical war fight. We certainly are also aware as we push that information down, some of the impacts that it may have on the Army networks that often operate on disconnected, intermittent, limited bandwidth environments, so to the extent that we can do processing as far forward at the point of collect and sense so we can only distribute the information that's absolutely necessary, we're working those concepts to do that. And that's where the artificial intelligence and machine learning comes into play. C4ISRNET: How have acquisitions changed over the last few years? From the outside we've seen a lot more usage of Other Transaction Authorities across the Department. What is your thinking on OTAs and other acquisition vehicles? COLLINS: We have really adapted our acquisitions — now more than ever — using more agile and more tailored acquisition approaches. Each endeavor, each capability that we go to pursue, often has a unique set of circumstances such as the technology maturity, the types of requirements, the types of things that we need to integrate—even our intellectual property approaches. Now more than ever, we've got multiple pathways on the acquisition approach that we can pursue: tailoring traditional, pursuing mid-tier, there's now software pathways, and there's always quick reaction and engineering change proposals to existing programs. So there's a number of different approaches, and I would tell you, too, our ability to involve soldiers in the operational feedback and operational perspective in the process is also kind of new and something that we've really underscored as part of the process. That starts not only from the requirements process, but how we include them in our source selection to assessing soldiers' hands-on kit and providing that feedback. OTA is just another tool that we have at our disposal. Certainly, if we need to do a little bit more maturation of prototypes prior to finalizing requirements, the OTA does offer an opportunity to more quickly pursue those prototypes in advance of transitioning into a more traditional FAR-type approach. I think there's a lot of flexibility and we're starting to do our critical thinking to decide how we approach each acquisition, because each acquisition and capability is unique. I'll tell you the other thing that we're really doing too is—where appropriate—exercising a DevOps or DevSecOps type of approach, and really that's where you bring material developer, combat developer, user, interoperability certifier, tester, and even to the extent the accrediter for those approaches, and they're all collectively together so you do things in parallel and you can dramatically speed up the process. Those are a number of things that we are really using at our disposal to move both more rapidly but also more efficiently and effectively. C4ISRNET: How do you incorporate smaller, nontraditional vendors that can bring in solutions? How do you bring more people into the fold, especially in tech hubs like Silicon Valley? COLLINS: We've got a lot of footprints in a lot of these technical hubs ... I would tell you that we've also done a tremendous amount of industry outreach even within the portfolio. I think in my tenure, in about a year I've probably done close to almost 200 industry engagements, and that spans from small, medium and large. And we're continuously trying to encourage and build relationships beyond just the traditionals. It is probably one of the advantages of the OTA that we've got, to be able to attract non-traditionals. I think there's other opportunities that we've got within Small Business Innovative Research-type initiatives that we've pursued, and then also CRADAs, the Cooperative Research and Development (Agreements). So we kind of span the gamut of that and I'll tell you we've got a pretty healthy teaming relationship between us and the [cross functional teams] to be able to get out there and attract that type of non-traditionals that really have a lot of the innovative and forward thinking ideas that we want to bring into our Army. C4ISRNET: We know a lot of the programs at places like PEO IEW&S take years to develop, with multiple PEOs overseeing and influencing different platforms. As you finish out your tenure, what are the milestones, programs you're proud of? COLLINS: First and foremost, I'll depart extremely proud of the people and the mission that the PEO IEW&S portfolio has accomplished and continues to accomplish. I'll tell you one of the unique things about our portfolio is about 50 percent of our programs support overseas operations, and so we do a significant amount of investment of things that are going on abroad. Much of our Army is deployed and so for that I'm extremely proud. I'll tell you the other thing — I think we have established a healthy culture that is ready, that is resilient and adaptive to change. And I think that has certainly been one thing that I'll be proud of, that I think will be a lasting legacy within the organization. We kind of walked in focused on a couple basic attributes. First and foremost, people and leadership was one. Two, exercising acquisition discipline. Three, integrating our kits so it can collectively operate and inform on the battlefield. And then four, really working with our partners and stakeholders. I think in each one of those areas we've made tremendous progress and really established a lot of momentum. Some of the major programmatics moving forward ... the Terrestrial Layer System, I think we've made some good progress there. Missile Defense and Space Systems set the conditions for our future aerial deep sense capability and really tightened kind of the major deep collect and nesting in with a lot of collecting in space and with our national mission partners. And then all of that data coming down to the foundational component are probably some of the big areas where we've established a lot of positive, irreversible momentum that will allow us to move forward on our Army modernization front. C4ISRNET: And as you move over to PEO C3T, what are you excited to tackle there and what lessons will you bring with you from PEO IEW&S? COLLINS: Well, I must admit that I am a signal officer and so I am excited to return to my roots as a network professional. And so I do find very much the network (to be) an exciting endeavor, and so I'm looking forward to getting back and contributing with the team. And I think what I would certainly take with me is that ... I have a better appreciation of the types of information, the types of data, the types of intelligence ... that need to traverse our networks, the type of demands that it puts on the network, the types of speed of service and quality of service and performance that are required to support those users of the network. So I think that's one of the key things that I'll take with me as I get ready to move over and be part of the C3T team, which I'm very excited (about). I've been very thankful for the experience here at the IEW&S team— a phenomenal group of professionals — and I'm excited to continue my Army mission. https://www.c4isrnet.com/battlefield-tech/it-networks/2020/06/09/what-the-armys-titan-program-means-to-multidomain-operations/