KNDS opens Ukraine subsidiary to enhance MRO of systems

Sur le même sujet

• 

  18 décembre 2023 | International, Naval

  Congress demands quicker fielding of hypersonic weapons interceptor

  Lawmakers have mandated the Pentagon field a defensive hypersonic interceptor several years earlier than current Defense Department estimates.

• 

  2 décembre 2019 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  How we talk about China — and why it matters

  Murray Brewster · Reports of human rights violations are pushing trading countries like Canada into a corner In both war and diplomacy, language matters. And if one thing was evident from the flood of words coming out of the Halifax International Security Forum last weekend, it's that Western democracies, despite their vows to uphold human rights, have no common language to define their view of — and relationship with — China. The world is rapidly approaching a crossroads with Beijing, a point where nations will have to decide whether to treat the burgeoning superpower as a trading partner, a rival — or an active threat. Secret Chinese documents were released to media outlets recently which show how the Muslim minority Uighur population is being locked up in mass detention camps and subjected to "systematic brainwashing." Beijing's violent response to pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong revived grim memories of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre. So is China a competitor or an adversary? 'Naive' about China's motives The answer to that question seems to depend on which country's leaders are answering it — how heavily Beijing has invested in their nations' markets, how badly their businesses want access to that vast Chinese market. "For many years, folks were naive about Chinese motivations," U.S. National Security Adviser Robert O'Brien told journalists during an on-the-record briefing in Halifax over the weekend. "In the past, the relationship with China was driven solely by trade, driven solely by economics." O'Brien describes China, rather antiseptically, as a "near-peer competitor," not as an adversary. Still, there were points during the briefing when O'Brien's language became decidedly adversarial — even dystopian — as he described the high-tech incarceration and forced re-education of as many as one million Uighurs. In the context of the dispute over allowing Chinese telecom giant Huawei into Western 5G wireless systems, O'Brien asked whether Western Europe would have allowed the Soviet Union into their countries to build railroads at the height of the Cold War. A new Cold War? On the record, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan also was not prepared to describe China as an adversary — but he was decidedly mushy when asked how we should describe it. The confusion on display in Halifax over the question of whether the West has arrived at the threshold of a new Cold War was widespread. U.S. Admiral Phillip Davidson, the commander of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, would not describe the current moment as "a new Cold War" but warned that the West needs to be prepared to continually "call out" China when it crosses internationally accepted lines. Many say some of those lines have been crossed already — through the arbitrary detention of the Uighurs (which China attempts to justify with the claim that it's fighting Islamic extremism) and through its program of constructing artificial islands in the South China Sea, which has been condemned by an international tribunal at the Hague. So, again ... rival or adversary? 'Feeding ... a monster' Lady Pauline Neville-Jones, a former top British diplomat and adviser to ex-U.K. prime minister David Cameron, said China has signalled it intends to become an "unequalled" high-tech nation. Beijing has said it's prepared to pour real money into achieving that goal — with Western nations supplying the world-class post secondary institutions that are training the next generation of Chinese engineers. "We are feeding something that could be a monster," she told the Halifax forum. "So what do we do about it? As long as we pursue our relations with China, largely separately on the basis of short-term national interest, I think we are giving away the game." It took Western allies several years to come with up a comprehensive Cold War strategy following the Second World War, she pointed out. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/china-u-s-sajjan-uighur-halifax-international-security-forum-1.5372856

• 

  3 février 2020 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité

  Pentagon finalizes first set of cyber standards for contractors

  Mark Pomerleau The Pentagon has finalized the long anticipated cybersecurity standards contractors will have to follow before winning contracts from the Department of Defense, a new process called the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) 1.0. The model is a tiered cybersecurity framework that grades companies on a scale of one to five based on the level of classification and security that necessary for the work they are performing. “The government and the contractor community must keep working together to address real and growing cybersecurity threats, and we need a robust response to protect our infrastructure, information, and supply chains,” said David Berteau, president and chief executive of the Professional Services Council, a trade association for federal contractors. “With today's announcement, DoD has achieved a significant milestone. Here's what industry officials need to know about the version finalized Jan. 31. Why it was needed Previously, the Pentagon did not have unified standard for cybersecurity that businesses needed to follow when bidding for contracts. Companies could claim to meet certain industry standards for cybersecurity, but those assertions were not tested by auditors, nor did the standards take into account the type of work a company was bidding to complete. Since then, defense officials have said that cybersecurity is not a one size fits all approach. In the meantime, adversaries have discovered it is easier to target unsuspecting down tier suppliers, rather than prime contractors. “Adversaries know that in today's great power competition environment, information and technology are both key cornerstones and attacking a sub-tier supplier is far more appealing than a prime,” Ellen Lord, the under secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, told reporters in a briefing at the Pentagon Jan. 31. Officials have said cyber theft by adversaries costs the United States about $600 billion a year. What will change? Contracts will mandate bidders reach a certain level of certification to win specific jobs. For example, if businesses aren't bidding on a contract that has extremely sensitive information, they must only achieve the first level of certification, which involves basic cybersecurity such as changing passwords and running antivirus software. More sensitive programs will require more stringent controls. Smaller companies down the supply chain will not, however, have to have the same level of certification as primes, said Katie Arrington, chief information security officer for the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and the point person for the certification. Another significant change with the new process is the creation of an accreditation board and assessors. The board is an outside entity, separate from DoD, that will be charged with approving assessors to certify companies in the process. The accreditation body was formed earlier this month and officials are working on identifying and training the assessors, which will be called Certified Third-Party Assessment Organizations (C3PAO). What's next? Officials explained Jan. 31 that CMMC will follow a crawl, walk, run approach to ensure companies aren't unprepared for the change. The accreditation board is in the process of training the auditors that will oversee the certificaion. Once the requirements are met, a company's certification is good for 3 years. In the meantime, DoD plans to release 10 requests for information and 10 requests for proposals that will include the new cyber standards this year. The first solicitation could come as early as June. Arrington said earlier this week that she expects 1,500 companies to be certified by the end of 2021. She added that all new contracts starting in fiscal year 2026 will contain the cybersecurity requirements, however, Lord noted that they will not be not retroactive to previous contracts. https://www.fifthdomain.com/dod/2020/01/31/pentagon-finalizes-first-set-of-cyber-standards-for-contractors/