Crooked Bough News Round-up

— HASC approves $150B defense increase as GOP shuts down amendments to curb Hegseth, DOGE

 

at 4/29/25 2:43pm

House Armed Services Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala., left, and ranking member Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., attend the House and Senate committee markup of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2024 in Dirksen Building on Wednesday, November 29, 2023. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images) WASHINGTON — The House Armed Services Committee voted through a $150 billion boost to defense funding today, after Republicans shot down almost two dozen Democratic amendments that were largely a referendum of the Signalgate scandal and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s leadership of the Pentagon. The bill was approved in a 35-21 vote, with Democratic Reps. Donald Davis, Jared Golden, George Whitesides, Gabe Vasquez and Eugene Vindman joining Republicans to pass the bill. Effectively untouched after about four hours of debate, the bill will now go to the House Budget Committee, where it will be combined with other pending legislation into a megabill aimed at codifying President Donald Trump’s wish list of spending cuts and funding increases to key focus areas like defense, energy and border security. Republicans plan to use a process known as reconciliation to approve that bill without threat of a Democrat filibuster. HASC Chairman Mike Rogers called the vote on the $150 billion defense bill — which adds tens of billions to priorities such as shipbuilding, munitions and the Trump administration’s Golden Dome missile shield — a “historic day” marking the first opportunity the committee has had to use the reconciliation process to add defense funding to the budget. But Rep. Adam Smith, HASC’s top Democrat, said he couldn’t support the $150 billion increase for defense because he didn’t support the overall reconciliation bill, which he called a “disaster for this country” that would cut funding for Medicare, the Centers for Disease Control and other programs that benefit the American taxpayer. “The second big problem here is were giving $150 billion to this Pentagon, to Secretary Hegseth and President Trump. They have not even begun to prove that there is a chance in hell that they will spend this money intelligently, efficiently and effectively. Secretary Hegseth has proven himself to be completely incapable of doing the job of Secretary of Defense,” he said, pointing to Signalgate and the workforce churn at the Defense Department, which has seen several aides of Hegseth fired due to allegations of leaking information to the media. “The Pentagon is being very poorly run. I see no evidence that theyre going to try to get any better. And what are they focused on? Theyre focused on a culture war,” Smith added. Republicans defeated an amendment from Smith, which would have fenced off 75 percent of the funding in the reconciliation bill until the defense secretary certifies that the Pentagon has a “viable mechanism to enforce a prohibition on the communication, transmission, or delivery of classified information” by department officials. They also rejected an amendment that would have blocked all funding in the bill from being spent until Hegseth vacated the position of defense secretary, with the amendments sponsor — Rep. Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa. — calling him incompetent, reckless and paranoid. Secretary Hegseth must go, and until he is no longer part of the government, no longer part of the DoD, I simply cannot vote to authorize this money in good faith and in good conscience, she said. Republicans batted down twin amendments from Rep. Pat Ryan, D-NY, which would have reduced Hegseth’s salary to $1 and prevented the Pentagon from obligating funds to defense contractors where a member of the company’s senior leadership team is working as a “special government employee.” The latter amendment was explicitly meant to mitigate conflict of interest concerns about SpaceX and Tesla founder Elon Musk, who Ryan said has been “put in charge, essentially, of the budgets of the very departments that pay him … while also getting access to information … that materially benefits himself and his companies.” Another two amendments targeting Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) were also defeated by GOP lawmakers. One would have blocked $50 billion in funding until Hegseth certified that DOGE activities weren’t affecting military readiness, while another blocked $50 billion in spending until the Defense Department provided a report on DOGE activities within the Pentagon. Other amendments — all voted down — would have blocked funding for a Pentagon makeup studio and a military parade. Other defeated amendments sought to limit the department’s ability to fire general and flag officers, as well as members of the Pentagon’s inspector general office. Despite broad bipartisan concerns about reports that the Trump administration could consolidate the US military’s combatant commands, GOP lawmakers also voted against an amendment that would prevent funding in the reconciliation bill being used to consolidate US Northern Command and US Southern Command, as well as a second measure to prevent the consolidation of US European Command and US Africa Command. Ryan, who sponsored the former amendment, argued that NORTHCOM and SOUTHCOM’s missions were “too different” for the commands to be combined, and expressed concerns that consolidation could negatively impact SOUTHCOM’s counterdrug and counternarcotics missions. Rep. Mikie Sherrill, D-N.J., who sponsored the latter amendment, said maintaining the independence of EUCOM was “critical” to ensuring cooperation with NATO as well as a continued focus on threats posed by Russia. In both cases Rogers countered that, while he shared Ryan’s and Sherrill’s concerns, the matter could not adequately be addressed during reconciliation, as other funding outside the bill could be used to consolidate combatant commands. Instead, he said, it should be debated as part of the fiscal 2026 defense policy bill. Three amendments addressed specific weapons programs, and all were defeated. One measure sought to limit funding in the reconciliation bill for the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile system until the Pentagon granted Milestone B on the program. Another would have zeroed out $2.4 billion for the nuclear Sea-Launched Cruise Missile, diverting that funding for military childcare. The third would have reduced funding for space-based and boost phase intercept capabilities meant for the Golden Dome missile shield by $2.6 billion, pushing those funds to various personnel-related spending such as military housing and bonus pay. In a separate loss for Democrats regarding Signalgate, House Republicans essentially blocked a congressional mechanism that Smith hoped to use to force the Trump administration to turn over all communications related to the Signal app text chat used by Hegseth and other top administration officials to share information about military operations. An environmental resolution approved by the House in a 216-208 vote included language that “turns off” privileged consideration of resolutions of inquiry until Sept. 30. Smith had filed a resolution of inquiry related to the Signalgate scandal on March 27.

[Category: Air Warfare, Congress, Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Networks & Digital Warfare, Pentagon, Adam Smith, Air Force, Army, cyber security, Defense Budget 2026, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Elon Musk, Golden Dome, Mike Rogers, Navy, networks, Pete Hegseth, Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile, SLCM-N, technology] [Link to media]

— Marines special ops focus on data at the edge, FPV drones in the air and AI on the way

 

at 4/29/25 2:13pm

US Marine Corps Sgt. Ediberto Ponce, an intelligence chief with Headquarters Battery, 11th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, tracks an RQ-20B Puma on a laptop during a training exercise at Marine Corps Base Camp Pendleton, California, Sept. 21, 2020. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Lance Cpl. Isaac Velasco) MODERN DAY MARINE 2025 — As the mission for Marine Forces Special Operations Command evolved from counter-terrorism (CT) to more of a supporting role for the joint force in the case of large-scale combat operations, operators realized very quickly they had a problem: data. So you have data that is at the forward tactical edge, and you need to get to a decision-maker. And so regardless of how were collecting that data somebody has to fill that gap to fuse it into a picture that a decision-maker can understand in order to authorize a lethal capability or non-lethal capability, Lt. Col. Matthew Deffenbaugh said. One solution, he said, is to do as much data fusion and analysis at the edge as possible, sending back smaller data packages that more quickly put enemy targets at risk. One thing that we can do because of our size — that is really hard to scale — is push that intelligence fusion to the lowest tactical level to be able to put [lower level officers] out on the tactical edge and enable them with the intelligence and communications capabilities to fuse all that data, Deffenbaugh said. MARSOC is hardly the only US military organization learning to swim in the new deluge of data at the tactical edge. The collection, synthesis and analysis of the info is the backbone of the Pentagons sprawling Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control effort. Its also not the only cutting edge technology MARSOC is racing to incorporate into its operations, according to other MARSOC panelists appearing at Modern Day Marine today in downtown Washington, DC. First-person-view (FPV) drones, Col. Shane Edwards said, are MARSOCs latest venture, as they appear to be for just about every military, paramilitary and non-state actor in the world. FPV is the thing that everybody talks about, he said. We see it all over the place. [The] technology is ubiquitous across the board. Maj. Gen. Peter Huntley, MARSOC commander and a fellow panelist, said, One thing I think that everybody recognizes, but we have all seen that the operating environment, whether youre talking at the operational level or whether youre talking at the tactical level, is evolving incredibly fast right now. Were operating in some of the most remote corners of the world right now, and were seeing that our adversaries [] just have incredible capabilities, he said. They said they have FPVs, right? They have the ability to sense you. They have the ability to hit you from a distance. Its a capability MARSOC is pursuing itself, part of a small-drone effort that includes loitering munitions, which Huntley told reporters after the panel have already been integrated into the force. He teased a coming breakthrough seemingly related to getting smaller unmanned platforms — not just aerial ones — to the squad or individual level, but didnt comment further. During the panel, Edwards said the use of small robots has been a gamechanger in modern combat and so has artificial intelligence. Speaking to reporters, Huntley said MARSOC is getting on board with AI because its coming, one way or the other. For his troops, Huntley said a key use of AI is in data aggregation. The automation of the intelligence cycle, and how to be at the cutting edge of that? he said. Because thats going to drive speed of your [decision making]. So if youre a slow adapter on that front, youre going to find yourself on the wrong side of that equation, and thats not a good place to be, right? Still, with all the data, drones and digital revolutions at play, Huntley said that if a war breaks out in the Pacific, the battlefield may be more complex than ever, but also disturbingly familiar. For the people that are going to be in the fight at the tactical edge, its going to be very similar to what our grandfathers saw in the Pacific campaign, he said. Its going to be freaking rough and nasty and all that stuff.

[Category: Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Networks & Digital Warfare, Army, artificial intelligence, cyber security, MARSOC, Modern Day Marine 2025, Navy, networks, Special operations, technology] [Link to media]

— Falling stars? Army weighing massive cut to generals, PEO offices and AFC power

 

at 4/29/25 1:33pm

An Army general received his fourth star during his promotion ceremony on Nov. 8, 2024. (US Army/Staff Sgt. Carolina Sierra) WASHINGTON — The US Army is weighing a massive overhaul that would see a reduction in the number of general officer billets and restructure the services organizations charged with developing requirements and buying weapons, Breaking Defense has learned. While no decisions have been made, the tentative plan would leave the Army Chief and Vice Chief of Staff as the only functional component four-star general officers, reduce the number of Program Executive Offices (PEOs) managing weapons programs, and merge Army Futures Command (AFC) with Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC). Two sources in industry have seen a document laying the plan out, while another three have heard details that match the document, they tell Breaking Defense. A timeline for such a plan being executed, or if the plan will go through at all, is unknown, but industry is taking it as a sign that major changeups are becoming inevitable with the Pentagons largest service. When informed of the details of the plan, John Ferrari, a senior nonresident fellow at AEI and retired Army Maj. Gen., said, “The CSA [Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen. Randy George], along with the new administration, is really looking hard at reducing the bureaucracy to enable the actual fighting units —so overall a good first step with more needed. An Army official confirmed that senior leaders are weighing this structural shakeup, but said a decision has not yet been made or no actions taken. A spokesperson with Army public affairs declined to comment and several other offices, including the services acquisition shop, did not respond to questions by press time Futures Command Without A Future? When AFC was stood up in 2018 under the first Trump administration, a four-star general was placed at the helm and charged with speeding up the requirements process in order to get tech and weapons into soldiers hands quicker. At the time, part of TRADOC’s mandate was redirected towards AFC, with the new command assuming responsibility for shepherding in new weapon requirements. As part of that change, for example, AFC created cross-functional teams (CFTs) around requirement portfolios like aviation, ground vehicles, long-range fires. According to the circulating document, the service is considering merging AFC and TRADOC together, and taking those CFTs and converting them back to Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate — an organization inside the service that helps develop and integrate capabilities based on doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities. “Some of this is back to the future, for example, AFC mostly came from TRADOC and so putting it back makes sense,” Ferrari said. “Additionally, AFC was premised on devolving to its acquisition authority and that did [not] happen, so it is a brave leader who says we tried it and it is not delivering results we expected and admits that out loud.” General Officer, PEO Reductions Both AFC and TRADOC are four-star billets right now, as are Army Forces Command and Army Material Command. Under the proposed plan, they would be downgraded to an undisclosed level. As a result of those billet downgrades, only the Army Chief of Staff and Army Vice Chief of Staff desks would be run by four-star generals, according to the tentative plan. (Presumably the combatant commands and component commands would remain four-star posts, but the document does not address those structures or any changes that may be coming.) Proposed changes to the Army’s structure do not stop with AFC and TRADOC. If senior military leaders ultimately sign off on the plan, the 13 Army PEOs that exist today will be pared down to nine. To get to that number, PEO Ground Combat Systems and PEO Combat Support & Combat Service Support will merge into one shop, while PEO Command, Control, Communications, and Network, and PEO Intelligence, Electronic Warfare and Sensors will also merge. The PEO for Simulation, Training and Instrumentation would be eliminated. (The document does not detail the additional change required to get down to nine PEOs). “Thirteen PEOs is a lot given how small the Army procurement budget actually is; one can imagine this might be the first step of a broader acquisition streamlining; each PEO is a bureaucratic stovepipe, and each PEO injects exponentially more synchronization issues, so this is a big move but getting to many fewer than nine is probably needed,” Ferrari speculated. Downgrading the PEO billets is also on the table. Today, each PEO is typically helmed by either a two-star or one-star general. But according to the paper, the remaining nine PEOs would all be one-star billets. The Army’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office, currently helmed by Lt. Gen. Robert Rasch, would also be aligned for a downgrade to a one-star post. The document notes that this would only occur once Rasch left, meaning this could potentially be a roadmap for how the service handles the other billet downgrades — waiting for a higher-level officer to leave before being replaced with a one-star. While Ferrari broadly supported that possible shakeup, one industry official said the plan to have only two functional four-star generals is “insane” and would hamper the PEOs ability to move out on programs. “It absolutely neuters the ability of the program offices to have maneuver space in the decision-making process, the source added. “One-stars don’t have the sway of power.”

[Category: Congress, Land Warfare, Army, Army Futures Command / AFC, cuts, Daniel Driscoll, downsizing, four-star, Gen. Randy George, general officers, Program Executive Office (PEO)] [Link to media]

— The Weekly Break Out Ep. 15: Pentagon reconciles itself to spending $150B extra

 

at 4/29/25 10:03am

This week on The Break Out, editors Aaron Mehta and Lee Ferran take a look at the $150 billion in defense funding provided by Congress through the reconciliation process. Even for the Defense Department, thats real money, and is poised to move the needle on ships, drones and the Golden Dome effort. Then after the break, the two discuss the annual SIPRI military spending report, and the surprising country that is now in fourth place overall. Make sure to like and subscribe to get The Weekly Break Out delivered right to your inbox every week.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Pentagon, Space, Air Force, Army, Break Out Video, Golden Dome, Navy, reconciliation, Space Force, video] [Link to media]

— Cut Army structure, not Army end strength

 

at 4/29/25 9:28am

Soldiers and retired Soldiers from the 89th Military Police Brigade participate in and watch the 64th MP Company, 720th MP Battalion, inactivation ceremony Jan. 16th, 2024, at Fort Cavazos, Texas. (U.S. Army photos by Sgt. Alexander Chatoff) The Pentagon should soon send Congress its “skinny budget,” which is an outline of what it intends to spend, but without specific funding tables. Since the new administration has taken control of the Pentagon, proposals including eight percent budget trims, trillion dollar budgets, and major weapon cancellations have dominated the news. Much less discussed is a reported — and disputed — proposal to cut Army end-strength by up to 90,000 troops. Across the services and in the Army, it’s time for realignments in operating dollars, weapon systems, research, capabilities, and posture. But those realignments should make the Army more capable and prepared, not less. While the Army needs to transform, the new administration should avoid reducing end strength in a short-sighted move to reduce costs. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is rightfully focused on the readiness of the force. History is replete with examples of unready Army forces being killed in the first battles of wars. From Kaserine Pass, to Task Force Smith, to the Iraq Insurgency, we know that unready forces, including undermanned units, risk more casualties and a higher chance of losing. The state of the Army is not as dire now as it was then, but there are cracks already showing. And while no president comes into office hoping for war, but when war finds the president, the defense secretary owes the president and the American people formations ready to prevail. For the Army, the main threat to readiness is the disparity between end strength, the actual “faces” in the Army, and force structure, the number of jobs or “spaces” in the Army. A force is considered “hollow” when it lacks the number of “faces” needed to fill all its “spaces.” Today, in the Army, the force structure is about 470,000 spaces but it currently has an active end strength of under 450,000 soldiers. That 20,000 space gap is the definition of unreadiness, and something needs to be done to prevent unneeded losses. The Army would obviously prefer to grow its end strength to solve this problem, but the current recruiting environment and probable levels of funding takes that option off the table. On first glance, one could say that the structure should be cut by 20,000 to make the end strength and structure match. But that would not fully solve the problem, because Army personnel are constantly in motion, moving, sick, or in school, all leaving “holes” in formations. As such, the secretary of defense should direct that all Army units be manned at 105 percent of authorized strength, to ensure that required numbers of “boots” are actually in the formations. That would entail cutting structure by another 20,000 spaces, for a total reduction of 40,000. This would put Army end strength, or “faces,” at 450,000 with the force structure, or “spaces,” at 430,000. Within that 430,000 structure, the Army will need to move and accelerate capabilities to create more drone and electronic warfare units, more “Golden Dome” units, and others. Another reason to not cut the Army’s end strength right now is that our adversaries are watching. While fixing shipbuilding, building the Golden Dome, and building the munition stockpiles are absolutely needed, they will take time, probably longer than the 3.5 years remaining in the administration. T.R. Fehrenbach said it best, and as one sees in Ukraine and the Middle East, you may fly over a nation forever, you may bomb it, atomize it, pulverize it and wipe it clean of life. But if you desire to defend it, if you desire to protect it, if you desire to keep it for civilization, you must do this on the ground the way the Roman legions did . . . in the mud. When you need Soldiers, as we learned in Iraq in the early-2000s, “You go to war with the army you have, not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time.” In this global threat environment, we need to avoid ending up in scenarios in which we really wish we had a more ready and capable Army. The president and the secretary of defense need options, and options have value. Army force structure can be rebuilt quickly if the Army has soldiers. Army end strength cannot be rebuilt quickly, as the Army learned it its Vietnam experience of “shake and bake” non-commissioned officers. With a new topline approaching $1T for national defense and with the Army providing cuts to civilian personnel, weapons, and other lower priority programs, the Pentagon should absolutely continue to increase readiness, but they should do it by cutting the force structure, not the end strength. Retired US Army Maj. Gen. John G. Ferrari is a senior nonresident fellow at AEI. Ferrari previously served as a director of program analysis and evaluation for the service.

[Category: Congress, Land Warfare, Opinion, Pentagon, Army, military readiness, Op-Ed Commentary] [Link to media]

— Israeli defense spending jumped in 2024, part of overall rise in Middle East: SIPRI

 

at 4/29/25 7:22am

The F-16I has been in service for 20 years with the IDF, and several squadrons fly the warplane. (IDF) BEIRUT — The Middle Easts share of global defense spending increased 15 percent in 2024, driven in part by a multi-billion jump by Israel amid a multi-front conflict, according to new data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). “Military expenditure in the Middle East reached an estimated $243 billion in 2024, an increase of 15 [percent] from 2023 and 19 [percent] more than in 2015,” a SIPRI report issued Monday said. Military spending in Israel increased by 65 percent or equivalent to $46.5 billion in 2024, which marks the highest annual increase since 1967, a product of conflicts in which Jerusalem is engaged from Gaza, to Yemen, to Lebanon and Syria. “Its military burden rose to 8.8 [percent] of GDP, the second highest in the world,” the report specified. RELATED: Germany surges to fourth largest global military spender, SIPRI says Meanwhile Lebanon, which is reeling from Israeli strikes both at the southern border and recently in the southern suburb of Beirut itself, also dramatically increased spending. While its starting budget is much smaller relatively, its spending went up 58 percent to a total of $635 million. “Despite widespread expectations that many Middle Eastern countries would increase their military spending in 2024, major rises were limited to Israel and Lebanon,” said Zubaida Karim, a researcher with the SIPRI Military Expenditure and Arms Production Programme, in the report. She added that other countries in the Middle East didn’t “significantly increase spending in response to the war in Gaza or were prevented from doing so by economic constraints.” Meanwhile, Iran’s military spending decreased by 10 percent to reach $7.9 billion in 2024, even though its affiliated arms groups like Lebanese Hezbollah and Yemeni Houthis were directly involved in various conflicts. “The impact of sanctions on Iran severely limited its capacity to increase spending,” the report justified. In 2023, Iran was the fourth largest defense spender in the Middle East with a total of $10.3 billion. On the Gulf side, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which has been one of the largest defense importers throughout recent years, increased its defense spending to $80.3 billion, which is a 1.5 percent rise only in 2024. That makes it the seventh highest defense spender worldwide, a drop from fifth in 2023, but ranking as the leading Middle East country.

[Category: Global, Business & Industry, Israel, lebanon, Middle East, Saudi Arabia, SIPRI] [Link to media]

— Defense tech company Epirus delivers counter-drone swarms to Navy

 

at 4/28/25 10:01pm

An artist’s rendering of Epirus’ high-power microwave technology being used by Navy warships. (Provided by Epirus.) MODERN DAY MARINE 2025 — Defense tech contractor Epirus today announced it delivered a counter-drone capability to one of the Navy’s warfare centers following demonstrations last year of the company’s Leonidas Expeditionary system. Expeditionary Directed Energy Counter-Swarm (ExDECS) is derived from Epirus’s Leonidas and was developed through a contract with the Office of Naval Research. It is a high-power microwave capability designed to fend off the kinds of attacks the Houthis have been using in the Red Sea involving explosive unmanned surface vessels and aerial drones. This time last year Epirus was preparing to demonstrate its Leonidas system, as Breaking Defense reported. “Drone warfare is changing the fight — fast. Systems like ExDECS give Marines a decisive advantage by neutralizing multiple electronic threats at once with a single system — what we call a one-to-many capability,” Andy Lowery, CEO of Epirus, said in a statement. “This delivery is a critical step toward fielding non-kinetic counter-swarm solutions that enhance the mobility, survivability, and lethality of our Marine forces.” Lowery told Breaking Defense last year that his company’s technology temporarily disables a hostile asset — such as the engine of an unmanned surface vessel — while remaining harmless to humans. The ExDECS prototype was delivered to the Naval Surface Warfare Center Dahlgren in Virginia where the system will “support the U.S. Marine Corps’ experimentation objectives to evaluate the benefits of HPM to the Low Altitude Air Defense (LAAD) mission and enhance Ground Based Air Defense (GBAD) capabilities,” according to Epirus. Epirus’s technology was previously picked up by the US Army through a 2018 competition by the service’s Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office. That competition led to a subsequent contract to Epirus for at least four production units, as well as contracts to several other companies.

[Category: Naval Warfare, Andy Lowery, Army, Drones, Epirus, Expeditionary Directed Energy Counter-Swarm, Modern Day Marine 2025, Navy] [Link to media]

— Amazon launches first 27 operational Kuiper satellites to compete with Starlink

 

at 4/28/25 5:34pm

Amazons first batch of operational satellites were carried to orbit on April 28, 2025 by a ULA Atlas 5. (Photo: Amazon Project Kuiper) WASHINGTON — Amazon today successfully launched its first operational satellites in its planned Project Kuiper broadband constellation, under development by billionaire-owner Jeff Bezos to compete against rival Elon Musk’s Starlink mega-constellation. The 27 satellites were lofted to low Earth (LEO) orbit by a United Launch Alliance (ULA) Atlas V 551 rocket, and will eventually migrate to their stationing orbit of some 630 kilometers (392 miles). Todays launch comes a year later than Amazon originally had planned, with the company required under its license with the Federal Communications Commission to have 1,663 Kuiper satellites up and running by July 2026. Amazon, however, is confident that it will make that deadline and already has scheduled an ambitious launch cadence to do so. Over the next few years, Kuiper and ULA teams will conduct seven more Atlas V launches and 38 launches on ULA’s larger Vulcan Centaur rocket. An additional 30-plus launches are planned across our other launch providers: Arianespace, Blue Origin, and SpaceX, according to an April 2 Amazon news release. SpaceX currently dominates the US and global marketplace — including sales to the US military and Intelligence Community — in large part because Starlink was the first constellation to provide low-latency, high-volume satellite communication required to host internet services, stream video and support data-dense military battle management networks. As of the end of March, there were approximately 7,135 Starlinks on orbit, according to astronomer Jonathan McDowell, who tracks mega-constellations on his open-source website. Amazon, which intends to put up about 3,200 satellites, thus has a ways to go to catch up to Starlinks level of service and, perhaps more critically, on price. Starlinks low costs of entry has gained a vast consumer base, that in turn provides the capacity for SpaceX to be able to promise dedicated bandwidth to higher priority customers like national governments and militaries, explained Tim Farrar, long-time telecoms industry consultant. The major issue [for Kuiper] is going to be competing with Starlink across the board in the consumer market, the enterprise market and the military market, and what that means in terms of the prices that they have to offer, he said. I think the biggest problem is that Musk and his companies have never really been focused on an economic return, much more on going as fast as possible and growing as much as possible and the top line. And so if Amazon attempts to compete with Starlink on price, it seems all too likely that Starlink would just cut its own prices. Nonetheless, there are a lot of hopes within DoD and the Space Force for Project Kuipers success, with officials seeing the constellation as offering diversity in the supplier base for so-called proliferated LEO, or P-LEO, services. Further, outside of the US there are intensifying concerns about relying on Starlink due to the political controversy surround Musk over his handling of SpaceXs activities in Ukraine and his recent forays into European politics on behalf of right-wing politicians. The European Commission, the European Unions politically independent executive arm, on March 18 [PDF] issued a Joint White Paper for European Defence Readiness 2030 that called on the EU to step up support for Ukraine, including by enhancing access to EU space assets and services as a key enabler of Kyivs defense capabilities. Asked by Reuters during a news conference last week about the status of discussions on Starlink alternatives in Ukraine, the European Commission’s defence chief Andrius Kubilius said there are solutions that will be implemented in the event of “unexpected developments,” but declined to elaborate. Europe needs to develop its own capabilities “in a rapid and urgent way,” Kubilius added. On Thursday, French satellite operator Eutelsat CEO Eva Berneke told Reuters that Germany for the past year has been paying to provide Ukraine with terminals for its OneWeb constellation that is seeking to compete with Starlink for LEO-based communications. Further, she suggested that the EU may also amp up OneWeb buys for Ukraine. However, Farrar said the European backlash against Musk may not actually help Amazon as much as it does regional firms like Eutelsat, or national companies like Canadas Telesat. If the EU is looking for an alternative to a US led system, that doesnt necessarily apply as much to Amazon, because, again, its coming from the US. That said, in February, Amazon announced that the UK telecommunications regulatory body, Ofcom, had given Kuiper permission to deliver internet service to domestic customers. The UK will be among the first countries to receive service once Kuiper is available, the announcement said.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, Space, Amazon, cyber security, Elon Musk, European union, networks, Project Kuiper, Space Force, SpaceX, Starlink, technology, Ukraine, United Launch Alliance] [Link to media]

— Navy Super Hornet lost to sea in towing accident

 

at 4/28/25 12:40pm

An F/A-18 Super Hornet from Strike Fighter Squadron 213 lands aboard the USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN-78) (Photo by Justin Katz/Breaking Defense.) WASHINGTON — A US Navy carrier strike group lost a Super Hornet F/A-18 and associated towing tractor today when both the aircraft and tractor fell overboard, according to a service statement. All personnel are accounted for, with one sailor sustaining a minor injury. The F/A-18E was actively under tow in the hangar bay when the move crew lost control of the aircraft. The aircraft and tow tractor were lost overboard, according to a statement from the Navy. The Super Hornet was embarked onboard the aircraft carrier Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) which is operating near Bahrain with its associated strike group of three destroyers and one cruiser. Sailors towing the aircraft took immediate action to move clear of the aircraft before it fell overboard. An investigation is underway, the statement continued. Accidents such as a lost Super Hornet always attract significant congressional attention. It comes at a time when the Trumans crew already had unwanted attention due to a collision with the civilian vessel Besiktas-M in February. On top of that, the Navy more broadly has multiple investigations ongoing regarding a friendly fire incident that also took place in the Red Sea late last year. The service chiefs are expected back on Capitol Hill in the coming months to testify before lawmakers about the new administrations first presidential budget request.

[Category: Naval Warfare, bahrain, Harry Truman (CVN-75), Navy, Super Hornet] [Link to media]

— ‘Blatant disregard’: Air Force, Senate panel face off over infrastructure spending

 

at 4/28/25 12:34pm

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin testifies before the House Armed Services Committee for the Department of the Air Force fiscal year 2025 budget request, Washington, D.C., April 17, 2024. (U.S. Air Force photo by Eric Dietrich) WASHINGTON — Over the past several months, Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Allvin has repeatedly stressed a key message: The Air Force has roughly 30 percent excess infrastructure, and if the service is going to free up funds necessary to spend on top priorities, officials must be able to shrink installation footprints where prudent. Speaking at the Apex Summit held in National Harbor, Md. last week, Allvin once again hit on the topic, while putting a marker down that hes ready to go to the mat over what he views as Congress exacerbating the issue — leading to scathing pushback from Senate Armed Services Committee Republicans, but a more receptive response from its House counterpart. “We’ve got too much infrastructure, and oh, by the way, Congress passed a law that said theyre going to expect us to pay double for that excess infrastructure that we dont want, he said. We’ve got to fight that.”  Allvin was referring to a specific clause in the fiscal year 2025 National Defense Authorization Act requiring the military services to incrementally increase their spending on plant replacement value (PRV), which essentially measures how much it would cost to replace an existing facility under current construction methods. The bill required spending to rise to 4 percent of PRV by the 2030 timeframe, a stipulation lawmakers said would force the services to improve installations whose dismal conditions have been extensively documented by watchdog reports. Allvin previously discussed the NDAA requirement during a speech at the McAleese defense programs conference in March, saying that it would require roughly $13 billion more in annual spending that was “unexecutable” for the Air Force — especially given that the service has infrastructure it doesn’t “need.” But in comments to Breaking Defense, a spokesman for the Republican majority on the Senate Armed Services Committee made clear that Allvin’s bid for legislative relief from the provision would not fly — turning a wonky budget issue into an unusually public back and forth between a service chief and his authorizing committee. “Why a service chief would publicly oppose a provision that was adopted last year on a 25-0 roll call vote in committee is beyond me,” the spokesperson said. “This blatant disregard for maintaining our barracks and facilities is an affront to the troops, their families, and to the taxpayers. That old way of thinking is why the Department of Defense has over $200 billion backlog in maintenance projects. This is a readiness problem that feeds the recruiting and retention disaster that has plagued the Air Force and the Department at large. Informed of the SASC comment, Allvin told Breaking Defense that, I truly appreciate what Congress has done to support our Airmen, including its assistance in ensuring our warriors live and work in quality infrastructure. My challenge is the roughly 30 percent excess infrastructure across our Air Force, which does not increase quality of life for our Airmen, nor the lethality of our force, Allvin said in a statement. I hope Congress will help us reduce that waste, as the taxpayers, our Air Force, and our great nation are all better served if that money goes towards warfighting and readiness. Removing Excess, Saving Money? In contrast, a House Armed Services Committee staffer told Breaking Defense that their committee remains amenable to discussing budgetary options with the administration. The staffer noted that the NDAA provision originated in the Senate and was agreed to in conference, when the HASC and SASC hammer out a final, compromise version of the bill, as both committees recognized that the Services have historically accepted risk in facilities sustainment, often at the expense of servicemembers’ quality of life. Congress routinely adds additional appropriations to the Facilities Sustainment and Restoration account to alleviate this chronic underfunding, the staffer said, noting that the authorizing committees $150 billion reconciliation bill for defense includes $8.45 billion to help alleviate the problem. USAF has never opposed Congress providing additional facility appropriations to support their mission. In theory, closing up shop on obsolete infrastructure sounds like an easy win, especially under a new aegis of DOGE that is searching for efficiencies across the government. But such moves are often met by resistance on the Hill for a range of reasons, from the effect they can have on a lawmaker’s district to potential risks in consolidating operations.  “Congress is tired about hearing from servicemembers, services, and families that barracks, offices, and motor pools are decrepit,” analyst John Ferrari at the American Enterprise Institute told Breaking Defense. Still, Ferrari said, the NDAA provision “was really just a ‘shot across the bow’ because it has no real effect.” Although the bill was authorized, appropriators did not back up the new requirements with necessary funds.  “[T]he fact is that Congress has not appropriated to the 4 percent,” Ferrari, a retired two-star Army officer, said. “So the authorization language is intent without teeth.” Allvin has previously expressed that excess infrastructure is a target as the Air Force weighs Defense Secretary Pete Hegseths direction to reallocate roughly 8 percent of the Pentagon’s spending. The status of the budget drill is not clear, though the effects will likely be more fully realized once the DoD’s FY26 budget is unveiled later this year.  Breaking Defense previously asked SASC Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., whether he would be supportive of a Base Realignment and Closure effort, which Allvin has publicly backed. “I don’t think there’s much there,” he said in a January interview. 

[Category: Air Warfare, Congress, 2025 NDAA, Air Force, Base realignment and closure, Defense Budget 2026, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Gen. David Allvin, infrastructure, John Ferrari, Pete Hegseth, Sen. Roger Wicker] [Link to media]

— India and France shake on contract for 26 Rafale naval fighters, said to cost $7.5B

 

at 4/28/25 11:35am

A French Rafale fighter jet lands in Koror, Palau (US Air Force) BELFAST — India has finalized a multi-billion-dollar contract with France for the acquisition of 26 Dassault-made Rafale Marine fighter jets and a wider package covering weapons, simulators and training. The inter-government agreement concluding the carrier-capable aircraft deal for the Indian Navy — split between 22 single seat and four twin seat jets — was signed in New Delhi today according to an Indian Ministry of Defense statement. The Indian MoD noted that part of the agreement covers “transfer of technology” to support integration of “indigenous weapons,” alongside approval for setting up local Rafale fuselage production and maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) facilities. The future MRO premises will be devoted to the care of aircraft engines, sensors and weapons. The statement did not disclose a contract value, but a figure of $7.5 billion was widely reported after Indias Cabinet Committee on Security approved the acquisition earlier this month. Aircraft deliveries “would be completed by 2030,” added the Indian MoD, adding that crew training will take place in both France and India. “Rafale-Marine has commonality with the Rafale being operated by IAF [the Indian Air Force],” it added. “Its procurement will substantially enhance joint operational capability, besides optimising training and logistics for the aircraft for both Indian Navy and IAF. The induction would lead to the addition of a potent force multiplier to the Indian Navys aircraft carriers, substantially boosting the nation’s air power at sea.” India initially selected the Rafale Marine in 2023 to replace aging Russian MiG-29 jets, and Delhi will be the first export user of the type. The new navy fleet adds to 36 Rafales in service with the IAF. In a supporting statement Dassault said that the new contract signature “confirms the Indian authorities’ satisfaction with the aircraft’s capabilities and their desire to broaden the spectrum of its operational use,” while stressing that the procurement “testifies to the importance of the strategic relationship between India and France and the recognition of the Rafale as an essential vector of national sovereignty.” The Indian contract also builds off several export orders secured by Dassault in 2024, including Indonesia (18 aircraft) and Serbia (12 aircraft). In 2021, the UAE also signed an extraordinary $19 billion contract for 80 aircraft. Based on full year results, the manufacturer delivered 21 of the twin engine combat jets last year, bettering a target of 20 units. Company guidance [PDF] indicates that production for 2025 will ramp up to hit a target of 25 aircraft. At a broader program level, France and Dassault are focused on strengthening Rafales future capabilities through development of the F5 standard and an unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) to accompany the jet, as a collaborative aircraft platform, beyond 2030.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Air Force, Asia, Business & Industry, Dassault, Europe, france, India, NATO, Rafale] [Link to media]

— Who’s Who in Defense: Jacky Rosen, Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services (SASC) Subcommittee on Cybersecurity

 

at 4/28/25 10:10am

Ranking Member, Senate Armed Services (SASC) Subcommittee on Cybersecurity Senator Jacky Rosen, D-Nevada   Responsibilities Created in 2017 following Russian hacking attempts against the US, the Senate Subcommittee on Cybersecurity is responsible for the policies and programs related to cyber forces, operations and capabilities within the DoD.  Rosen recently led questioning of Gen. William Hartman, acting commander of the U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency, about the challenges he faces in creating a dynamic cyber workforce during a time of hiring freezes and cuts. While acknowledging the challenges, Hartman explained that the Cybercom 2.0 model that outlines the modernization of U.S. Cyber Command remains on track.  For the full transcript, refer to: https://www.cybercom.mil/Media/News/Article/4150133/posture-statement-of-lieutenant-general-william-j-hartman/   Stated Priorities Strengthen cybersecurity alliances. Rosen successfully proposed that cybersecurity be included in the Abraham Accords, a series of diplomatic treaties between the U.S., Israel, the UAE, Bahrain and Morocco. Champion of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education in both teaching and job training.  Advocate of protecting Lake Mead and Lake Tahoe.   Committees/Caucuses Senate Committee on Armed Services. Senate Committee on Commerce.  Senate Committee on Foreign Relations. Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Subcommittee on Science, Manufacturing, and Competitiveness. Emerging Threats and Capabilities & Strategic Forces subcommittees. Subcommittee on Aviation, Space, and Innovation. Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Media. Chair of the Senate’s bipartisan Comprehensive Care Caucus. Co-founder and Co-chair of the Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism and the Abraham Accords Caucus. Co-founder and Co-chair of the bipartisan Women in STEM Caucus. In 2019, her sponsored Building Blocks of STEM Act was signed into law to increase the participation of young girls in computer science and related education.    Political/Business Career U.S. Senator from Nevada (2019-present).  Representative from Nevada (D-3rd Congressional District), which includes Southern Las Vegas. (2017-2019).  Computer software developer. Worked as a computer programmer at several companies in Southern Nevada.   Education Graduated from the University of Minnesota in 1979 with a B.S degree.  Earned an associate’s degree in computing and information technology from Clark County Community College (1985), now the College of Southern Nevada.    Background Jacky Sheryl Rosen was born in Chicago, IL, on August 2, 1957 to Carol and Leonard Spektor. Her mother worked as a homemaker. Her father, who served in the Korean War, owned a car dealership.   Personal Married to Larry Rosen, a radiologist, and they have a daughter.

[Category: Congress, Networks & Digital Warfare, cyber security, cybersecurity, networks, SASC Cybersecurity Subcommittee, Sen. Jacky Rosen, Senate Armed Services Committee SASC, technology, US Cyber Command (CYBERCOM), Who’s Who 2025] [Link to media]

— Amid Syria troop reduction, will Trump repeat Middle East withdrawal mistakes?

 

at 4/28/25 9:40am

U.S. Air Force Airman, a combat control technician assigned to the Combined Special Operations Joint Task Force Levant, watches a UH-60 Blackhawk land after clearing the landing zone in support of Combined Joint Task Force Operation Inherent Resolve in Northeast Syria. (U.S. Army photo by Staff Sgt. Emma Scearce) The Trump administration announced on April 18 a “consolidation of US forces in Syria,” where American troops are deployed to ensure the lasting defeat of ISIS. While details from the Pentagon are limited, DoD’s announcement makes clear that the “consolidation” of forces to “select locations in Syria” is also a reduction of US troops to below one thousand “in the coming months.” The Pentagon disclosed in December that roughly 2,000 US troops were stationed in Syria at that time, an increase from the last publicly known troop count of roughly 900 before the wave of attacks on US forces by Iranian proxies in Iraq and Syria following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas terror attack on Israel. And though the Defense Department promised to continue strikes against ISIS and keep pressure on the terror group, the reduction in forces runs counter to warnings from US military and intelligence professionals. It also risks a repeat of failings by previous American presidential administrations. Indeed, an objective assessment of the situation in Syria makes clear an excessive or premature reduction of US forces could catalyze a costly ISIS resurgence. That, in turn, could force the US military to return to Syria later at a greater cost against a worse ISIS threat that could have been prevented, endangering US interests in the Middle East and undercutting efforts to prioritize the threat from China. According to The New York Times, the process to reduce forces has already begun with three of the US military’s eight bases in Syria set to be closed, including Mission Support Sites Green Village and Euphrates, located in the country’s northeast. These strategically located bases near the Syrian-Iraqi border enable US forces to support local partners combatting ISIS in the Euphrates River zone. To justify the decision, DoD pointed to the “success” that the United States has had battling the terrorist organization over the past decade, including the territorial defeat of the ISIS caliphate in 2019 and the fact that “ISIS’ appeal and operational capability regionally and globally” have been seriously degraded. But that clashes with the recent assessments of US Central Command (CENTCOM) and the US Intelligence Community, which have warned that ISIS remains a threat. While the ISIS caliphate is indeed territorially defeated, the terrorist organization itself is not, and a premature withdrawal of US forces risks an ISIS resurgence. In its March 2025 Worldwide Threat Assessment, the US Intelligence Community made clear that ISIS remains “the world’s largest Islamic terrorist organization” despite facing “major setbacks.” The assessment also stated that ISIS “sought to gain momentum from high-profile attacks” and pointed to several ISIS-connected terrorist attacks over the past year in the region and beyond, including the New Year’s Day attack in New Orleans, which killed 14 people and was “influenced by ISIS propaganda.” The US military has also sounded the alarm about a potential ISIS resurgence. In July 2024, CENTCOM announced that ISIS was on pace to double its number of attacks in Iraq and Syria compared to the previous year, which CENTCOM took at the time as an indication that “ISIS is attempting to reconstitute.” CENTCOM Commander General Erik Kurilla warned lawmakers last year that an “ISIS resurgence remains a threat” and that “ISIS would reconstitute the ability to seize territory within two years” should Iran and Russia succeed in their goal of evicting the US-led coalition from Syria and Iraq. Kurilla has also warned about the risk of the thousands of ISIS fighters held in prison camps in Syria guarded by the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), which rely on support from US forces in the country. In January, CENTCOM stated that these 9,000 ISIS prisoners and the additional tens of thousands of displaced persons, many of whom have ties to ISIS, in refugee camps in Syria “risk creating the next generation of ISIS.” The Pentagon’s announcement made clear these detainees are still a concern. To be sure, the situation in Syria has dramatically changed after the fall of the Assad regime, and the US military posture in Syria may need to be adjusted to reflect that reality. But we should not ignore these warnings and the fact that ISIS is attempting to take advantage of the current instability and uncertainty in Syria to increase its ability to conduct attacks. This dissonance between the Trump administration’s plan in Syria and the recent warnings of US military leaders and intelligence professionals begs for congressional oversight. Here are some questions that members of Congress and their staffs may want to ask: Do US military leaders and intelligence professionals no longer have the concerns they expressed just a few months ago, or have the concerns simply been suppressed in support of a politically motivated withdrawal? What is the current strength of ISIS in Syria and what are the terror group’s ambitions, plans, and activities? How is the new regime in Damascus impacting these ISIS variables? How secure are ISIS detention facilities? In what ways does the SDF still rely on the US military for support? What will be the consequences if that support is reduced or ended? What impact could US military withdrawals have on Turkey’s military presence in Syria, and how might that hurt US interests and the SDF’s efforts to counter ISIS terrorists and keep thousands of them detained? While periodic assessments and adjustments in force posture are prudent and necessary, especially after dramatic developments, such adjustments should be informed by the advice of military leaders and actual conditions on the ground. Withdrawals based on domestic political considerations and arbitrary timelines invite disaster and risk repeating the mistakes of past withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan. In its announcement, the Trump administration asserted that its “consolidation” of US forces in Syria is a “conditions-based process.” Time will tell if that is true. If Trump repeats past mistakes by conducting timeline-based withdrawals that ignore conditions on the ground, this will not end well. Cameron McMillan, an Iraq veteran of Operation Inherent Resolve, is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracy’s Center on Military and Political Power, where Bradley Bowman is the senior director.

[Category: Global, Land Warfare, Army, Middle East, Op-Ed Commentary, syria] [Link to media]

— DOGE-related workforce cuts have left the Navy with a ‘big challenge,’ CIO says

 

at 4/28/25 8:25am

DoDIIS 2023 Ms. Jane Rathbun (Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Wade Costin) WASHINGTON — The Department of the Navy is facing a “big challenge” in the wake of workforce cuts spurred by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, the service’s Chief Information Officer said Thursday.  Jane Rathbun said that the losses have been a result of DOGE’s deferred resignation program coupled with return-to-office mandates.  “It’s been a big challenge for us,” Rathbun said of the cuts during a Potomac Officer’s Club event Thursday. “The first set of directives coming out for all agencies was the ‘Fork in the Road’ or the deferred resignation program. We were able to say where we thought people should be exempt, like in the cyberspace, cyber workforce. … Their position might end up being exempt, but they could still take the Fork in the Road.”  “That’s scary,” she added.  The “Fork in the Road”, or the deferred resignation program, was an initiative taken up by the Office of Personnel Management under the direction of DOGE that allowed federal employees to enter a paid leave status for several months prior to resigning or retiring. The program ended on Feb. 12 across the federal government, but the DoD extended its own deferred resignation program until April 14 in an effort to reduce its civilian workforce.  Echoing previous comments, Rathbun was not directly critical of DOGE, rather emphasizing that her office was very much in partnership with them, because we see the need for efficiencies too. However, she acknowledged that she’s lost people throughout the various program executive offices across the DON that she deemed as necessary.  “In some cases, we lost some people that we wanted to lose, but we lost some people that we didnt want to lose because of the remote work change, and so thats really challenging. How are we going to keep the right people?” she said.  When selecting those who will be exempt from certain workforce cuts, Rathbun said she wants to prioritize those skilled in the information warfare portfolio.  “Hopefully, and we still dont know the answers to these things, we will be given the ability to hire for strategic positions and hire for strategic need,” she said. “In my opinion, the information warfare portfolio is critical right now to the war fight, like we are not going to have more ships overnight, but we could really exponentially change the war fight with the kinds of things that the IT, cyber, information warfare portfolio deliver.”   “So I think hopefully we will be given the ability to bring more, bring the right people in, or maintain the billets that we have, even though weve lost some people.”  As of March 18, the Pentagon has approved nearly 21,000 employee resignations in line with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s effort to cut 5 to 8 percent of the military’s civilian workforce, the Military Times reported. 

[Category: Naval Warfare, Networks & Digital Warfare, civilian workforce, cyber security, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), information warfare, Jane Rathbun, Modern Day Marine 2025, Navy, networks, Pete Hegseth, technology] [Link to media]

— Germany surges to fourth largest global military spender: SIPRI

 

at 4/27/25 10:02pm

Bundeswehr soldiers hold German flags with a federal eagle and a banner with the inscription Heimatschutzregiment 4 during a roll call. The army is forming a new homeland security division as its fourth major unit. Photo: Hannes P. Albert/dpa (Photo by Hannes P Albert/picture alliance via Getty Images) STOCKHOLM — Berlin’s military expenditures soared to $88.5 billion in 2024, positioning it as the world’s fourth-largest military spender and the highest in Central and Western Europe for the first time since Germany’s reunification in 1990. Germany is now spending 1.9 percent of the countrys GDP, approaching NATO’s current target of 2 percent. This represents a 28 percent increase from 2023 and an 89 percent rise since 2015, according to a new Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) report. The US remains the world’s largest defense spender, outlaying $997 billion last year, a 5.7 percent annual increase. China took second place, with an estimated $314 billion, a 7 percent increase over the same period. Russia, in third, spent an estimated $149 billion, a 38 percent increase over the previous year.  But the big story may be Germany’s sudden surge, which was fueled by a €100 billion ($105 billion) extra-budgetary fund established in 2022, which continued to bolster Germany’s defense capabilities in 2024. The German parliament greenlit significant arms procurement and military research initiatives, partly financed by this fund, enhancing the nation’s defense infrastructure. Among the most noteworthy procurement contracts in 2024 are Leopard 2 A8 main battle tanks, additional U-212CD submarines, Patriot PAC-3 missile defense systems, and 155-millimeter artillery ammunition.  A record number of 97 major procurement and development projects were approved by the Bundestag’s budget committee in 2024, where “most of the funding came from the, now exhausted, €100bn special fund,” Lorenzo Scarazzato, a researcher at SIPRI’s Military Expenditure and Arms Productions Program, told Breaking Defense.  Germany also provided $7.7 billion in military aid to Ukraine in 2024, making it the second largest donor to Ukraine’s defense efforts, trailing only the United States’ $48.4 billion in financial aid, equipment and training support to Ukraine. This underscores Germany’s growing role in global security and its commitment to supporting allies amid ongoing geopolitical tensions. RELATED: Zeitenwende reloaded: Cash is good, but can Germany reform its procurement processes? The latest adopted guidelines in Germany and several other European countries indicate that Europe has entered a period of high and increasing military spending, “which is likely to continue for the foreseeable future, Scarazzato said. Germany’s eastern neighbor, Poland, which lies closer to the borders of Russia and Ukraine, saw its military spending rise by 31 percent in 2024 to $38.0 billion, representing 4.2 percent of GDP — the highest defense burden in Central and Western Europe and slightly above the 4 percent target set by the government in 2023. In the year Sweden formally joined NATO, its military expenditure surged by 34 percent to $12 billion, reaching 2 percent of GDP and aligning with the alliance’s defense spending target. The increase reflects a dramatic escalation over the last decade, with Sweden’s military budget more than doubling over the decade from 2015 to 2024, according to SIPRI’s data. At the same time, Sweden’s Scandinavian neighbors exceeded NATO’s 2024 target of 2 percent of GDP for military spending: Denmark reached 2.4 percent, followed by Finland at 2.3 percent and Norway at 2.1 percent.  The full database from SIPRI can be seen by clicking here.

[Category: Air Warfare, Global, Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Air Force, Army, Europe, Germany, Navy, Poland, SIPRI, Sweden] [Link to media]

— Shipbuilding, Golden Dome and munitions win big as GOP unveils $150B bill to boost defense

 

at 4/27/25 6:23pm

USS Massachusetts (SSN-798), the 25th Virginia-class fast attack submarine. under construction at Newport News Shipyard in Virginia in 2022. (photo courtesy Huntington Ingalls Industries) WASHINGTON — Shipbuilding, the Golden Dome missile defense effort and munitions production were the big winners in the reconciliation bill put forward by the Republican leaders of the House and Senate Armed Services Committees, making up about half of  the $150 billion investment. The defense funding is one piece of what will become a larger package of spending increases and cuts in line with President Donald Trump’s priorities. Congressional Republicans plan to use a process called “reconciliation” to get the bill over the line without threat of a filibuster from Democrats. “This legislation is a historic investment of $150 billion to restore America’s military capabilities and strengthen our national defense,” said HASC Chairman Mike Rogers, R-Ala. “America’s deterrence is failing and without a generational investment in our national defense, we will lose the ability to defeat our adversaries. With this bill, we have the opportunity to get back on track and restore our national security and global leadership.” SASC Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., called the bill a “generational upgrade for our nation’s defense capabilities, including historic investments in new technology.” HASC will take up the bill on Tuesday in a marathon markup session that will allow Democrats the opportunity to amend the bill before it is sent to the House Budget Committee. During a background briefing last week, a senior congressional aide said SASC was not obligated to hold its own markup, but that the current plan was to have a markup that would allow minority members of the committee to weigh in on the bill. HASC’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Smith of Washington state, criticized Republican’s tactic of using the reconciliation process, calling it a “spending gimmick” that allows the GOP to beef up its own funding priorities while slashing Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. “While there may be bipartisan support for investing in defense spending that supports the quality of life of our service members and their families, readiness, innovation, and modernization, these investments should be considered through the normal authorization and appropriations process,” he said. Here are the highlights of the pending legislation: Shipbuilding Shipbuilding came out as the big winner of the bill, with almost $33.7 billion designated to build new ships, construct unmanned vessels and ameliorate some of the shipbuilding industrial base’s challenges with attracting workers and modernizing infrastructure. The bill includes $4.6 billion to build a second Virginia-class submarine in fiscal 2027 and $5.4 billion for two additional Arleigh Burke-class destroyers. It invests in amphibious ships, adding $2.1 billion for the San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock program and $3.7 billion for the America-class amphibious assault ships. Lawmakers granted a $1.8 billion boost for the landing ship medium program, as well as an additional $160 million for advanced procurement, and $2.7 billion for T-AO oiler procurement. The bill also includes $600 million to lease or purchase new ships through the National Defense Sealift Fund and $695 million to implement a multi-ship amphibious warship contract. In the area of drone ships, the bill adds $1.5 billion to expand small unmanned surface vessel production, $1.8 billion for medium unmanned surface vessel production, and $1.3 billion for unmanned underwater vehicle production. For the shipbuilding industrial base, the bill adds $750 million for supplier development, $500 million to incorporate advanced manufacturing techniques, $500 million in additional dry dock capability, $450 million to apply autonomy and AI to the shipbuilding process, and $450 million for maritime industrial workforce development programs, among other initiatives. Golden Dome Trump’s Golden Dome missile shield was the second biggest recipient of cash, getting $24.7 billion to kick off the initiative, which will tie together already existing programs as well as new development efforts. In the realm of “next-generation missile defense technologies,” the bill adds $7.2 billion for the development and procurement of space based sensors, $5.6 billion for space-based and boost phase intercept capabilities, $2.4 billion for non-kinetic missile defense capabilities and $2 billion for air moving target indicator military satellites. To augment “layered homeland defense,” lawmakers include $2.2 billion to speed up the development of hypersonic defense systems, $1.9 billion for improved ground-based missile defense radars and $800 million for accelerated development and deployment of next-generation intercontinental ballistic missile defense systems. RELATED: How Trump’s ‘Golden Dome’ upends four decades of nuclear doctrine Munitions Munitions — often a source of funding cuts for the Defense Department and Congress alike — picked up the third-biggest level of investment, with $20.4 billion spent among a long list of various weapons for the Navy, Army, Air Force and Marine Corps. The biggest winners included $688 million for the development and procurement of long-rang cruise missiles that will be able to be used by multiple services, $630 million for the development and production of long-range air defense and anti-ship missiles for the Navy, and $500 million for maritime mines. This pot of funds also included $4.5 billion in grant funding to shore up the munitions industrial base and $2.5 billion to improve US production of critical minerals. Lawmakers also added a further $1 billion to expand the one-way attack drone industrial base and $200 million for the solid rocket motor industrial base. Scaling Up Production of  Low-cost Weapons A total of $13.5 billion goes to a laundry list of programs meant to bring more innovative, low-cost tech to the Pentagon, giving the Defense Innovation Unit $2 billion to scale up production of commercial technologies for military use and adding $1 billion “for the expansion of programs to accelerate the procurement and fielding of  innovative technologies.” Lawmakers hope to boost the industrial base for small drones by $1.1 billion and add $500 million to prevent delivery delays for attritable drones. It adds $1 billion for the development and procurement of low-cost cruise missiles and a further $500 million for low-cost cruise missiles that can be exported to allies and partner nations. The bill includes $650 million for joint prototyping and experimentation activities performed by the Pentagon’s mission capabilities office, $500 million to accelerate the development and integration of 5G and 6G technologies, and $400 million for further development of the Joint Fires Network. Nuclear Deterrence Of the $12.9 billion included for programs associated with the nation’s nuclear enterprise, the biggest sum — a total of $4.5 billion — will go to accelerate the production of B-21 stealth bombers. The bill also includes $1.5 billion in risk-reduction activities for the troubled Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program, which is currently under review by the Air Force, and $500 million for improvements to the current Minuteman III ICBM system. Lawmakers added $2 billion to accelerate the development and procurement of a nuclear armed sea-launched cruise missile — bolstering a program started in the last Trump administration amidst Democrat concerns. They also added $400 million to accelerate development of the Trident D5LE2 missile employed by nuclear submarines, $210 million for additional MH-139 helicopters used to patrol ICBM fields, and $62 million to convert existing Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines to be able to house additional missiles. RELATED: America’s nuclear arsenal to cost $946B over next decade, government report reveals Air Superiority Tactical aircraft procurement and modernization received $7.2 billion, with the largest sum being an addition of $3.1 billion to increase F-15EX production. Lawmakers boosted funds for next generation fighter and drone programs, including $678 million to accelerate the Air Force’s collaborative combat aircraft program and $400 million to speed up production of the service’s recently awarded F-47 sixth-generation fighter. The Navy, meanwhile, got $500 million to accelerate its own sixth-gen fighter, known as F/A-XX. Both services got a boost in funds for classified programs, with the Air Force receiving $300 million and the Navy receiving $230 million. The bill adds $440 million to increase C-130J production and $474 million to increase EA-37B Compass Call production. It also includes $160 million to accelerate nacelle improvements for the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft. The bill also includes $361 million to prevent the retirement of certain F-22s and $127 million to prevent the retirement of F-15E fighters. Other key investments Lawmakers set aside $11.5 billion to improve the readiness of the services, with money flowing to spare parts, depot maintenance and equipment for Special Operations Command. Meanwhile $11.1 billion went to activities associated with Indo-Pacific Command, including additional funds for exercises, improved infrastructure at INDOPACOM bases and military support for Taiwan. To accelerate the Pentagon’s goal to pass an audit by the end of 2028 the bill spends $380 million, with funds broken out to improve business systems and start incorporating more automation in the department’s finance enterprise. The bill also includes $9 billion for servicemember quality of life initiatives, $5 billion to augment personnel and logistics costs associated with US military activities at the southern border, and $2 billion for military intelligence programs.

[Category: Congress, Land Warfare, Naval Warfare, Pentagon, Space, Army, B-21 Raider, Business & Industry, DDG-51 Arleigh Burke, Defense Budget 2026, Drones, F-15EX, F-47, Golden Dome, Navy, reconciliation, Space Force, Virginia class submarine] [Link to media]

— Navy Secretary axes contracts for fleet maintenance software, ‘DEI,’ climate in $300M purge

 

at 4/25/25 1:15pm

The Secretary of the Navy, the Hon. John C. Phelan, gives a speech over the pilot house 1MC to the crew of the world’s largest aircraft carrier, USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), April 11, 2025. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jacob Mattingly) WASHINGTON — Secretary of the Department of the Navy John Phelan has released two memos cancelling a slew of grants and contracts aimed at what he called “eliminating wasteful spending” in the DoD, including those related to ship and aircraft maintenance software. “I commend the DOGE [Department of Government Efficiency] team for finding these opportunities to help save the Navy and increase our readiness and war-fighting capability,” he said. Between the two memos the Pentagon will save almost $300 million, Phelan said in a video posted to X. In the memo related to maintenance, Phelan directed the termination of all contracts under the DON’s Naval Maintenance, Repair and Overhaul (NMRO) logistics program. The NMRO program was established to help predict potential system failures on ships and aircraft using artificial intelligence, digital twins and other predictive analytics.  “The NMRO logistics program is critical software for the Navy. However, for 5 years systems integrators have over-engineered the software to the point where it is unusable. Upon the recommendation of Navy leadership, the current contracts under the NMRO program shall be terminated. This will allow the Program Office to apply the savings towards a new strategy to meet our needs,” Phelan wrote. Defense prime Lockheed Martin and enterprise applications developer IFS were awarded the NMRO contracts in 2021. After publication, a Lockheed spokesperson said in a statement that, We welcome the opportunity to engage with the Navy on their assessment and new strategy and will continue to apply our expertise to ensure maintenance capabilities can be rapidly deployed to the U.S. Naval Services to ensure mission readiness.  Phelan wrote that collectively the IT contract cancellations represent over $568 million in total contract value, which he estimates will allow the Navy to “repurpose” up to $200 million in taxpayer funds in a “more effective manner.” Phelan also directed Navy Chief Information Officer Jane Rathbun to come up with a new acquisition strategy and a management review for the NMRO program by July 31.  A second memo focused on what Phelan described as DEI, climate change and other programs that he said “are not aligned with DoD and DoN priorities.” Phelan directed the termination of 45 grants and contracts. He wrote that “examples” of cancelled contracts include the following:  $2.7 million grant to the University of South Carolina to study development,  assessment and simulation of enabling fuels for naval de-carbonization   $3 million grant to Carnegie Mellon University to study Persuasion, Identity, and  Morality in Social-Cyber Environments $1.1 million contract for Gender advisor services at NAVSUP FLC Pearl Harbor   $409,637 grant to Arizona State University to study engendering and leveraging trust in longitudinal human-AI interactions   $146,293 grant to University of Hawaii to study population consequences of  disturbance of humpback whales in the context of climate change  Additionally, earlier this week Phelan announced he’s rescinding a Navy plan focused on combating climate change established by the Biden administration. Phelan said that the 45 terminations announced Thursday represent over $87 million in total award value, which he says will save up to $41 million in taxpayer funds that the Navy can “better apply to critical  priorities.”  At the end of the memo he called for the assistant secretary of the Navy for Research, Development, and Acquisition to collaborate with the contracting offices in charge of the grants and contracts to “ensure  immediate cancellation and prompt disposition of remaining funds and associated activities in  accordance with this order.” Phelan’s memos come only a few weeks after Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth published a memo on April 10 directing the termination of four major IT consulting contracts and 11 additional contracts across the Pentagon related to consulting services that “support Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI), Climate, Covid-19 response, and non-essential activities.” Hegseth claimed the contract terminations called out in the April 10 memo will save the department over $5 billion.  UPDATED 4/26/25 at 1:26 pm ET with comment from Lockheed Martin.

[Category: Naval Warfare, Networks & Digital Warfare, Pentagon, artificial intelligence, climate change, cyber security, Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Information Technology, John Phelan, Navy, networks, Pete Hegseth, technology] [Link to media]

— Elon Musk sat in on job interview for Air Force’s top civilian

 

at 4/25/25 12:29pm

Troy Meink, secretary of the US Air Force nominee for US President Donald Trump, during a Senate Armed Services Committee confirmation hearing in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, March 27, 2025. (Photographer: Tierney L. Cross/Bloomberg via Getty Images) WASHINGTON — SpaceX founder Elon Musk was present at President Donald Trump’s interview of his Air Force Secretary nominee Troy Meink, confirmed Meink in written responses to Sen. Elizabeth Warren obtained by Breaking Defense. Musk was “one of many” people present at the meeting and only Trump directed questions toward the nominee, Meink stated. However, the disclosure could raise further concerns about Meink’s ties to SpaceX and Musk after Reuters reported in February — citing seven people familiar with the matter — that Musk had recommended Meink for the job after Meink helped push a multi-billion dollar satellite contract toward SpaceX. Meink — who is currently the National Reconnaissance Office’s principal deputy director — said that, to his knowledge, Musk played no role in his selection as the Air Force secretary nominee and that the billionaire did not make any requests of Meink in return. “I have no relationship with Space X or Mr. Musk outside of a professional relationship in execution of my current duties,” Meink stated, adding in a separate response that he had never been counseled that he had a conflict of interest. Details of Musk’s presence at Meink’s interview was first reported by Politico. Warren, D-Mass., and Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., previously raised concerns about Meink’s nomination in February following the publication of the Reuters article, which they said included “incredibly serious allegations of misconduct and favoritism.” In their letter, the senators asked Meink to respond to questions about his relationship with Musk and SpaceX — questions that Warren said in a statement today have not been sufficiently answered. “Musk sitting in on Meink’s interview was highly inappropriate, raising more questions about whether he hand-picked Meink — and if so, why,” Warren said. “What was Elon’s role here and what does he get out of it? Nobody elected Musk to anything—he should not be selecting our national security officials, especially if they have the power to give him billions in taxpayer dollars.” It is unclear whether news of Musk’s presence during Meink’s interview could put pressure on his nomination, which could come to a vote as soon as next week. However, at his confirmation hearing last month in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Meink faced no questions from lawmakers about his ties to Musk, with senators largely concerned about parochial matters or specific weapons programs of interest. Beyond answering questions about Musk in his written responses to Warren, Meink provided responses about how he would ensure a fair bidding process for industry competitors if confirmed to be the Air Force secretary. “I have a long and distinguished record of encouraging innovation, competition and expanding the industrial base during my time at the NRO,” he said. “If confirmed I would bring that experience to the Department of the Air Force and ensure that leadership at all levels was actively encouraging innovation and competition in the defense industrial base.” He also distanced himself from comments made by Musk in November that “manned fighter jets are obsolete in the age of drones.” “I do not associate myself with those remarks,” Meink wrote.

[Category: Air Warfare, Congress, Space, Air Force, Elizabeth Warren, Elon Musk, Space Force, SpaceX, Troy Meink, Trump nominations] [Link to media]

— Pentagon seeks open-source software for 5G, 6G networks

 

at 4/25/25 12:18pm

Composite image of modern city network communication concept. (Weiquan Lin/Getty Images) WASHINGTON — As the US military makes big bets on 5G and future 6G networks for everything from streamlining supply lines to controlling combat robots, it doesn’t want to be beholden to the handful of huge tech firms that dominate the market today. So the Pentagon will soon seek bids to develop prototype “open” software — code that any company can freely access and deploy on its devices — in hopes of breaking down barriers to innovation. “We need to open up the systems,” Thomas Rondeau, the Pentagon’s director for FutureG network technology, declared at the Scoop News AITalks conference in Washington on Thursday. Specifically, “we want an open-source platform for the future of 6G and beyond,” he said at the Apex Defense conference on Wednesday. That software platform is what the Pentagon calls OCUDU, short for Open Centralized Unit/Distributed Unit. (These “units” are different parts of a 5G network’s “stack” of software applications: A single Central or Centralized Unit handles high-level network functions and oversees multiple lower-level Distributed Units.) Rondeau and his staff have been dropping public hints about OCUDU for months. Then, on April 9, the public-private National Spectrum Consortium announced that the Defense Department would be holding a virtual “industry day” briefing on OCUDU on May 7 and issuing a formal Request For Prototype Proposals (RPP) soon thereafter. What Rondeau released this week was the full timeline for the OCUDU competition — and it’s a tight one. He expects to issue the RPP at the beginning of June, with companies’ proposals due by the end of that month. His team then aims to evaluate all the proposals in a couple of weeks and start awarding contracts in late August or early September. OCUDU is the Pentagons piece of a much larger effort to shake up telecommunications. Today, 5G networks around the world are dominated by a few large companies, like China’s Huawei and ZTE, South Korea’s Samsung, Taiwan’s Media Tek, and the USA’s own Qualcomm. These companies offer integrated, proprietary packages of software and hardware: You can’t run a Huawei wireless router using Qualcomm software or vice versa, let alone customize your kit by adding plug-and-play software modules or hardware components from innovative small companies. RELATED: Pentagon needs further industry collaboration on O-RAN development for 5G interoperability A broad-based movement is trying to change this status quo by developing what’s called Open Radio Access Networks (Open RAN). The first Trump administration supported Open RAN efforts, and the second seems to have picked that ball back up, for example by raising the issue at a February meeting between President Donald Trump and Japanese prime minister Ishiba Shigeru. At the Pentagon, the drive for Open RAN is led by Rondeau’s team at the FutureG office, which reports to the undersecretary for research and engineering. “One of the areas that weve been really focused on is open RAN,” Rondeau said at Apex. “Open architecture solutions [are] going to help grow US industry and our ability to execute technologies.” The ambitions here are lofty. Just as open-source LINUX software made possible the modern internet, and open-source Kubernetes software opened up cloud computing, OCUDU is meant to open up telecommunications, Rondeau said. What’s more, he explained, it’s meant to be a “dual-use” technology that’s suitable for both a wide range of civilian applications and the military’s “very unique, very niche needs.” The military is particularly interested in transmitting data to and from whats called the tactical edge, where frontline troops, unmanned vehicles and all sorts of sensors operate far beyond fixed infrastructure like cell towers or cloud-computing data farms. Thats not only a harsh environment, but a rapidly changing one, with each side constantly adapting its technology and seeking new weak points in the enemys, as combat experience in Ukraine has shown. “As we watch the contested spectrum fight unfold in Ukraine, its teaching us a lot about the need for innovation,” he said Wednesday. “Rapid innovation and agility on the battlefield is required today to fight and win wars — and you cant do that in the closed boxes, in the big bulky box that we have today. Weve got to break that open.” We‘ve got to enable the tactical edge by enabling solutions to be developed and fielded at a much faster pace, he said. Carley Welch contributed to this report. 

[Category: All Domain, Networks & Digital Warfare, Pentagon, 5G, 6G, cloud computing, cyber security, Drones, Multi-Domain Operations, networks, Open Centralized Unit Distributed Unit - OCUDU, technology] [Link to media]

— Four steps Trump can take during his Middle East visit to contain Iran

 

at 4/25/25 12:02pm

US President Donald Trump speaks during a meeting in announcing the F-47 6th generation fighter jet in the Oval Office of the White House on Friday March 21, 2025.(Demetrius Freeman/The Washington Post via Getty Images) The White House this week announced that President Donald Trump’s first overseas trip of his second term will take him to the Middle East, with stops in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. This visit will be especially significant because Trump has correctly zeroed-in on the Middle East to resolve today’s global crises — from the threats facing Israel, to the future of Gaza, to the Ukraine war. He has also taken strong actions against the single actor at the center of each of these flashpoints: the Iranian regime. The timing of the visit is crucial. Direct negotiations are already underway between the US and Iran regarding the future of Iran’s nuclear program, a critical potential crisis with far-reaching consequences for regional and global security. Trump has set a clear objective for these negotiations: the complete dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program. He’s also set a firm tone, backing up his stance with decisive action. He welcomed Israel’s Prime Minister to the White House twice, launched airstrikes against Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen, and deployed substantial US military assets to the region. It’s no secret that the window for negotiations with Iran is short — and that military action will likely follow if diplomacy fails. Diplomatic outreach by Trump and his team is commendable and must be supported, but we must be clear-eyed about the Iranian regime, particularly in light of its past behavior. Iran will try to use negotiations to buy time as it rushes towards a nuclear weapon. Trump wisely continues to remind the ayatollahs that he will pivot to military options should Iran not negotiate in good faith. The goals for this visit can therefore be twofold: US assurance to our regional partners and coordination on negotiations and preparation if they fall apart. The objective will be to preempt Iranian retaliation and to keep the regime on the defensive. There are four steps the US and its partners should take to achieve this goal: First, increase visible military activity. The US and regional partners must conduct joint drills focused on missile and drone defense, anticipating the kinds of attacks Iran is likely to launch at Israel or other US partners in the future. Those drills should also be used to prepare for offensive strikes against Iran’s proxies if they’re activated as part of Tehran’s broader response. Second, look at Russia. Russia has already warned of possible retaliation should Iran come under military pressure. We must be alert to the possibility of escalation across multiple theaters — and be ready to respond decisively wherever needed. Third, assess non-military threats. Since Hamas’s Oct. 7 attack, the Iranian regime has conducted cyberattacks, plotted assassinations, and mobilized global influence campaigns — including pro-Hamas demonstrations on US college campuses. Fourth, shore up regional partnerships around protecting Israel. Twice over the past 18 months our regional partners came to Israel’s aid when Iran launched massive barrages of ballistic missiles and drones. Iran’s attacks, one of which was the largest ballistic missile assault in history, targeted major cities across Israel. Despite the scale of the assault, most of the projectiles were intercepted mid-air and caused only one casualty. The support for Israel from our regional partners has been multifaceted. The collaboration between Israel and our partners, alongside their quiet support for Israel behind the scenes — which included blocking a bigger Arab embargo on Israel in the immediate aftermath of Oct. 7 — all this support for Israel exposed our Arab partners to Iran’s wrath. These countries are geographically nearer to Iran and the Iranian regime certainly has taken note. The United States and its partners must prepare for the day when negotiations inevitably fail. The aforementioned steps will not only help prepare for that day but will help continue to build our leverage in those talks. Most importantly, they are the right thing to do independent of negotiations to bring while, at the same time, putting the region back on the path towards peace. Jacob Olidort, Ph.D. is Director of the Center for American Security at the America First Policy Institute.

[Category: Global, Opinion, iran, Israel, Middle East, Op-Ed Commentary, Qatar, Saudi Arabia] [Link to media]

— Jim Carroll, former Trump official, to lead Professional Services Council

 

at 4/25/25 10:54am

Jim Carroll, then the Director of Office of National Drug Control Policy listens during a news briefing at the James Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House January 30, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Alex Wong/Getty Images) WASHINGTON — The Professional Services Council (PSC), a leading trade group for government contractors, announced today that former Trump official Jim Carroll will take the reins of the organization. Carroll takes over for David Berteau, who headed the trade association for over nine years, starting on May 19. “Jim Carroll’s exceptional track record in public service, corporate governance, and policy advocacy makes him the ideal leader to guide PSC into its next chapter,” Zachary Parker, chair of the PSC board of directors, said in an announcement. “The Board and I look forward to working with Jim.” Carroll served in several roles during the George W. Bush administration but is most notable for his time with Trumps first administration — experience a number of Washington groups are looking to find at this moment. From 2016 to 2018, Carroll served as Principal Deputy Chief of Staff, Deputy White House Counsel, and General Counsel of the U.S. Office of Management and Budget, according to a PSC release. Afterwards, he served as Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP), a high-profile role given the administration’s focus on opioids. He most recently worked at the law firm Frost Brown Todd. The move comes at a time when the Trump administration, and its Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) group, have taken aim at government contractors. In the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered the cancellation of over $5 billion in outside IT contracts, and seeks to bring that work in house — a move Berteau recently told Breaking Defense is unlikely to work out. “When comparing fully burdened costs, contractors can actually be more cost-effective in certain scenarios, especially when considering the overhead associated with expanding permanent federal staff,” Berteau said in that report. “Contractors bring flexibility and agility, which are essential in rapidly changing technological environments. Contractors can be brought in quickly, adapt to specialized needs and scale projects up or down efficiently.” Berteau steps down after leading the trade group since March 2016. He previously served as assistant secretary of defense for logistics and material readiness in the Obama administration, and as a senior vice president with the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

[Category: Networks & Digital Warfare, Business & Industry, cyber security, David Berteau, Jim Carroll, networks, Professional Services Council, technology] [Link to media]

As of 4/30/25 12:56am. Last new 4/29/25 4:24pm.