Crooked Bough News Round-up

— How cargo drones could reshape Marine Corps resupply

 

at 4/29/25 6:15pm

The Marine Corps is looking for medium-sized cargo drones to handle supply missions across the far-flung islands of the Pacific. One company hopes its acquisition of a drone from an uncrewed-logistics pioneer will put it in the running. On Tuesday, Piasecki announced it had acquired Kaman Air Vehicles’ KARGO program, a medium-lift drone that fits in a standard trailer and can lift a 500-pound payload for long distances, or a 1,000 pound payload for short missions of about 100 nautical miles, John Piasecki, the president and CEO of Piasecki Aircraft, told Defense One. But those numbers will likely change as the Marines examine their resupply needs more fully.  The Army and the Marines both need a variety of cargo drone types and payloads, from relatively small ones that only travel short distances to what Piasecki called medium-range drones, capable of carrying 500- to 800-pound payloads, as well as even heavier-duty ones. The Marines are discussing the tradeoffs of extending the payload requirement to 1,400 pounds, he said.  “It’s all [in] flux, and so well see how the Marine Corps requirements evolve,” Piasecki said.  Distance isn’t the only challenge the Marines face in the Pacific. There’s also component parts, food, fuel and other supplies—the sorts of supply missions where sending human helicopter pilots out is costly and risky, relative to the cargo. It’s also an area other drone companies haven’t been focused on, he said. “We think we could generate more value to the end-customer in these missions where we were relieving high-value assets, helicopter assets,” running resupply missions that shouldn’t require a human pilot or an expensive helicopter. Kaman has long been in the business of trying to roboticize cargo delivery for the military. It achieved a big first in 2011 with the flight of a remote-controlled heavy lift helicopter, the K-Max, in Afghanistan. Despite the success, the K-Max never became a program of record, as Marine Corps needs changed and the limited autonomy was a problem. Autonomy has come a long way since, reducing the need for a human remote controller, Piasecki said. But more importantly, the modular design of the KARGO and the digital backbone will allow for the platform to become a better pilot as technology and data advance, without big re-designs.  Another factor that makes the project more feasible now, he said, is that the commercial market has demanded it  in fields like mining and oil, where workers in remote places such as off-shore oil rigs have few solutions to get important resupplies and parts. TheMarine Corps and the Army are also both trying to shift to smaller, more disaggregated units and away from large formations, which are increasingly easy to target. KARGO-sized drones could help.  “The Marines have identified vertical-lift logistics as a key strategic focus area, because they see it as critical enabling capability for distributed operations.” Kaman demonstrated one of the two prototypes to the Marine Corps last summer and to the Army last fall, he said. ]]

[Category: Business]

— DARPA takes aim at China's telecom hacks in AI-cyber contest

 

at 4/29/25 10:00am

SAN FRANCISCO — The final round of a cybersecurity competition run by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency will take inspiration in part from a Chinese hacking campaign discovered last year that was found to have burrowed into major U.S. telecommunications systems and their wiretapping platforms. The final round of DARPA’s AI Cyber Challenge, scheduled to run at the DEF CON conference in August, will task seven teams with crafting an AI-powered system designed to secure open-source software that underpins critical infrastructure sectors like water systems and financial institutions. Teams will be expected to use AI to find and fix bugs in code that undergirds functions of critical infrastructure systems, working with both full code bases and smaller code blocks to mimic real-world debugging of computer system vulnerabilities. Kathleen Fisher, director of the Information Innovation Office at DARPA, told Nextgov/FCW at the RSAC Conference in San Francisco, California that that DARPA is “100% inspired by the Salt Typhoon and Volt Typhoon stories, and needing to make the critical infrastructure software more robust from all those stories.” The Salt Typhoon hacks refer to the Chinese intrusions that hit telecom providers — both in the U.S. and around the world — and were discovered in 2024. Volt Typhoon is a separate hacking unit that has been burrowing into non-military critical infrastructure systems like water treatment plants, preparing to disrupt them and cause widespread panic once commanded to do so by China’s central government, officials say. “I don’t want to say too much about the specific challenges, because I don’t want to leak too much. Running a competition is super challenging because you need to be fair to all the competitors and such,” she said. “But we have been talking to the critical infrastructure partners from all the different sectors about the threats that they’re seeing and choosing the software to run the competition based on the feedback from all of those people.” Fisher’s remarks signal how Chinese hacking operations have played an outsized role in the design of the DARPA competition, meant to help critical infrastructure owners and operators quickly find and fix vulnerabilities in their platforms using agentic AI — a subset of artificial intelligence that can make decisions autonomously without constant human intervention. Last summer, in the semifinal round of AIxCC, some of the competition’s simulated software flaws were inspired by already-known vulnerabilities. But in the spirit of real-world scenarios where hackers frequently modify and innovate on their techniques, many of them were newly-created. Salt Typhoon, whose intrusion campaign had lingered for around two years but was only discovered last spring, accessed at least nine American telecommunications operators. Modern telecom networks operate as a complex mix of antiquated technology integrated with contemporary digital infrastructure. In certain areas, security measures were robust, but in others, outdated practices left vulnerabilities that the Chinese hackers identified and exploited. Salt Typhoon also breached America’s “lawful intercept” systems that house wiretap requests used by law enforcement to surveil suspected criminals and spies. Telecom firms are required to engineer their networks for intercepts under the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, or CALEA, which passed in 1994. “The spectacle of these events is to teach people … about the risks and about the tools and techniques we could use to lower that threat threshold,” Fisher said, using an analogy of a missile launch. “Leaving the vulnerabilities in our software is the equivalent to leaving ourselves vulnerable to that kind of [missile] attack.” ]]

[Category: Science & Tech]

— The D Brief: Jet falls off carrier; Yemen-bombing stats; Global defense-spending spike; Amazon’s first satellites; And a bit more.

 

at 4/29/25 9:04am

The U.S. Navy lost a F/A-18E Super Hornet aircraft Monday during an engagement with the Houthi militants off the coast of Yemen. But it wasn’t in the air when it happened. A tractor was towing the $67 million jet to “a hangar bay when the move crew lost control” and “the aircraft and tow tractor were lost overboard,” the service said in a statement.  The jet was part of the USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) aircraft carrier, which was carrying out an “evasive maneuver” that sent the Super Hornet sliding off the deck and to the bottom of the Red Sea, a U.S. officials told CNN and USNI News.  About the evasive maneuver: “You typically do a series of alternating 30- to 40-degree turns. Each takes about 30 seconds each way, but the turn starts sharply. It is like riding in a zig-zagging car,” Carl Schuster, a former Navy captain, told CNN. “The ship leans about 10 to 15 degrees into the turn” if the ship is moving at maximum speed, he said. Fortunately, “All personnel are accounted for, with one sailor sustaining a minor injury,” the Navy said. And “The Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group and embarked air wing remain fully mission capable.”The carrier has been deployed since September, when it departed its home port in Norfolk.  How deep is the Red Sea? Near Yemen depths can reach around 1,000 meters farthest from the banks. But some of the deepest parts of the sea (more than 2,000 meters) are closer to the Saudi coast. Due to security considerations, it’s unclear exactly where in the Red Sea the carrier was when Monday’s incident occurred.  The carrier strike group has been in the region since late February assisting President Trump’s escalated airstrike campaign against the Houthis, headquartered in Yemen’s capital city of Sana’a. Several recent intense airstrikes around Yemen (in Sadah and Hodeidah, e.g.) have killed dozens of people, according to Houthi officials.  While the U.S. military has carried out many recent airstrikes inside Yemen, it is not alone. The Houthis have attacked Israel with missiles, and the Israelis have periodically responded with their own airstrikes over the past several months—extending a conflict that began when Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023, prompting Houthi attacks on U.S., Israeli, and commercial shipping through the Red Sea in professed solidarity with Hamas.  Operation Rough Rider: The Pentagon’s Yemen airstrike campaign, named for the country’s 26th president, has been ongoing for 45 days. The U.S. military on Sunday said it has “struck over 800 targets” since it began on March 15. “These strikes have killed hundreds of Houthi fighters and numerous Houthi leaders, including senior Houthi missile and UAV officials,” Central Command officials said while avoiding specific names. “The Houthis have continued to attack our vessels, [but] our operations have degraded the pace and effectiveness of their attacks,” CENTCOM said Sunday. “Ballistic missile launches have dropped by 69%” since March 15, and “attacks from one way attack drones have decreased by 55%.” It’s still not at all clear how long the campaign will continue, or how much it will eventually cost, or even if it will ultimately succeed. The first four weeks of bombing were estimated at more than a billion dollars, according to the New York Times. But there have been other costs as well: “So many precision munitions are being used, especially advanced long-range ones, that some Pentagon contingency planners are growing concerned about overall Navy stocks and implications for any situation in which the United States would have to ward off an attempted invasion of Taiwan by China.” And if the loss of a Super Hornet sounds familiar, “In December, an F/A-18 Super Hornet flying from the aircraft carrier was shot down by the guided-missile cruiser Gettysburg, which was accompanying the Truman,” the New York Times reminded readers.  Read more: “How US strikes against Yemens Houthis have unfolded,” via Reuters, reporting Monday.  Welcome to this Tuesday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 2013, all seven crew members were killed when their cargo plane crashed shortly after takeoff from Bagram Airfield after an improperly secured load dramatically altered flight physics, according to the National Transportation Safety Boards final accident report (PDF). 100 days of Trump 2.0 Two DOGE employees received accounts on classified networks holding nuclear secrets, NPR reports. A Department of Energy spokesperson denied the reporting, then confirmed it, but said the two men—Luke Farritor, a 23-year-old former SpaceX intern, and Adam Ramada, a Miami-based venture capitalist—had not actually used the accounts. Experts and sources told NPR that:  “The DOGE employees presence on the network would not by itself be enough for them to gain access to that secret information, as data even within the networks is carefully controlled on a need-to-know basis.” The access could be considered a “‘toehold’ that would allow DOGE staffers to request information classified at the secret level.” Said one source: “Theyre getting a little further in. Its something to make note of...It could lead to something bigger.” Read, here. On Sunday, DHS suddenly ordered employees to report to the office the following day, GovExec reported Monday. Those unable to adjust were forced to burn a vacation day. Like much of the federal government, the Homeland Security department had been phasing in return-to-work efforts when the edict came down. Some workers were told that they would be sent home after checking in because there was no office space available; others were told to send selfies to prove they had complied with the short-notice order. More details, here. Additional reading:  “10 key numbers that sum up Trumps 1st 100 days,” via NPR reporting Tuesday;  “Numbers show no mass deportation of migrants, despite Trump immigration crackdown,” Scripps News reported Monday; White House officials say that’s because border crossings have dropped;  “Some Hatch Act restrictions loosened under the Trump administration,” GovExec reports. The changes allow federal employees to wear partisan-themed clothing, and reopen a loophole that allows some complaints to be judged by the White House instead of an independent body.  And “With Anti-Trump Platform, Mark Carney Wins New Term as Canada’s Prime Minister,” the New York Times reported Tuesday.  Etc. Global military spending rose last year in a spike unseen since 1988, according to the latest annual data (PDF) from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, or SIPRI, released Monday.  The $2.7 trillion spent in 2024 also capped a 10-year run of consecutive rises across the globe. But the “9.4 percent increase in 2024 was the steepest year-on-year rise since at least 1988,” SIPRI said in its new report.  And as we discussed in a three-part podcast series last year (which addressed spending in Russia, Asia, and overall), “For the second year in a row, military expenditure increased in all five of the world’s geographical regions, reflecting heightened geopolitical tensions,” SIPRI writes.  Driving all this spending: “the ongoing Russia–Ukraine war, and in the Middle East, driven by the war in Gaza and wider regional conflicts,” but also as U.S. officials have requested of Europe for the past several years, “Many countries have also committed to raising military spending, which will lead to further global increases,” SIPRI observed.  And lastly: Amazon just launched its first Kuiper internet satellites, which could eventually put some pressure on Elon Musk and his Starlink program in fairly wide military and civilian use today.  More than two dozen of the broadband satellites were carried toward low-earth orbit Monday via United Launch Alliance Atlas V rocket taking off from Floridas Cape Canaveral Space Force Station. “It was the first of more than 80 planned launches to build out the Project Kuiper megaconstellation, which will eventually harbor more than 3,200 spacecraft,” Space-dot-com reports.  In contrast, “SpaceXs Starlink broadband network, which already beams service down to customers around the world, currently consists of more than 7,200 operational spacecraft. And Starlink—perhaps Project Kuipers biggest competitor—is growing all the time.” (Here’s a real-time visualization of the Starlink constellation.) Also notable: “Ground stations will connect the Kuiper satellites to the web services infrastructure in a manner that could also allow companies to communicate with their own remote equipment,” the NYTs reports. “For example, Amazon has suggested that energy companies could use Kuiper to monitor and control remote wind farms or offshore drilling platforms.” Read more at Reuters or AP. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The D Brief: Army’s runaway tank; Ukraine’s ‘long-range, remote combat’; Pyongyang confirms involvement; Trump’s natsec ‘emergencies’; And a bit more.

 

at 4/28/25 9:12am

The U.S. Army made a tank it doesn’t need and can’t use. Now it’s figuring out what to do with it. Defense One’s Meghann Myers lays out the jaw-dropping history of the M10 Booker combat vehicle off a candid interview with Alex Miller, the Army’s chief technology officer. “This is not a story of acquisition gone awry,” Miller said. “This is a story of the requirements process creating so much inertia that the Army couldnt get out of its own way, and it just kept rolling and rolling and rolling.”  “The Booker is a stark reminder of what can happen when the system is checking the boxes but doing no critical thinking,” Myers writes. “With the service under pressure to streamline the way it develops new technology, the Army has vowed to turn things around.” Read on, here. The Army is rolling out a generative AI workspace to improve daily operations, while also working to reduce the heavy computing demands on the back end. Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams has more, here. Additional reading:  “Musk’s role in Air Force nominee’s job interview sparks ethics concerns,” Politico reported Friday;  “Over 200 people detained, including military members, at unlicensed nightclub in Colorado, DEA says,” ABC News reported Sunday;  And a “Suspected US airstrike hits Yemen migrant centre; Houthi TV says 68 killed,” Reuters reported Monday.  Welcome to this Monday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 1945, former Italian journalist-turned-fascist dictator Benito Mussolini was shot and killed near Lake Como one day after his capture by the Italian resistance movement.  Ukraine developments Battlefield latest: The war in Ukraine now “primarily features ‘long-range, remote combat’ over meeting engagements between infantry and armored vehicles,” ISW reported Sunday.  “Ukrainian and Russian forces field new adaptations over the course of months rather than years and are constantly experimenting, further driving the feedback loop of increased reliance on technology and tactical innovation to maintain battlefield advantages,” ISW wrote, echoing some of the U.S. Army’s newest priorities as well. “The innovation and operational concepts being forged in Ukraine will set the stage for the future of warfare,” ISW predicted.  Russian troops are also reportedly attacking via motorcycles and ATVs more now. The smaller vehicles offer an advantage against drone attacks that have successfully targeted “heavy armored vehicles close to the line of fire” since Putin launched the invasion, ISW writes.  Russia’s Vladimir Putin has unilaterally announced another short-term ceasefire for his Ukraine invasion, this time lasting three days so that Moscow can celebrate the end of the Second World War. Putin claims the cessation of hostilities will span May 8 to May 10, and “Russia believes that the Ukrainian side should follow suit,” Kremlin state-run media TASS reported Monday.  Putin had previously announced a 30-hour truce over Easter, but Ukrainian officials accused Russia of violating that unilateral ceasefire “nearly 3,000 times,” according to the BBC. TASS, for its part, on Monday accused Ukraine of violating that Easter ceasefire 4,900 times.  Ukraine reax: Why not ceasefire now? “Why wait for May 8? If we can cease fire now from any date and for 30 days—so that it is real, and not just for a parade,” Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha wrote on Twitter, alluding to a U.S.-backed proposal to cease fighting for 30 days. “Ukraine wants peace more than anyone else in the world. We never wanted this war, and we want it to end as soon as possible,” he added. “What we require is pressure on Russia and a clear strengthening of Ukraine, which will deprive Moscow of any illusions that it can turn the tide in its favor.” Panning out: Analysts at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War wrote in their newest assessment Sunday, “Ukraine remains open to good-faith dialogue with Russia and is willing to consider territorial issues, while Russia fails to offer any concessions of its own and insists on terms tantamount to Ukraines surrender.” What’s taking Trump so long to end a war he said he could stop within 24 hours of taking office? “Well, I said that figuratively, and I said that as an exaggeration,” Trump told Time magazine in an interview published late last week marking his first 100 days in office. “Obviously, people know that when I said that, it was said in jest.” Fact check: “It wasn’t ‘in jest.’ Here are 53 times Trump said he’d end Ukraine war within 24 hours or before taking office,” via CNN’s Daniel Dale reporting Friday.  Trump seems to finally be coming around to the idea that Putin is not interested in ending the war. On Saturday, the president took to social media after speaking with Ukrainian President Volodymir Zelenskyy at the Vatican. “There was no reason for Putin to be shooting missiles into civilian areas, cities and towns, over the last few days,” Trump wrote online.  “It makes me think that maybe he doesn’t want to stop the war, he’s just tapping me along,” the president bemoaned, suggesting Russia “has to be dealt with differently, through ‘Banking’ or ‘Secondary Sanctions?’ Too many people are dying!!!” Read more: “How Trump Plays Into Putin’s Hands, From Ukraine to Slashing U.S. Institutions,” via veteran White House correspondent Peter Baker of the New York Times, reporting Saturday (gift link).  New: North Korea finally confirmed it sent soldiers to Russia, state-run KCNA announced in a lengthy message Monday. The message was a public note of appreciation, KCNA said, “for performing heroic feats in the operations to repulse and frustrate the grave sovereignty infringement by the Ukrainian authorities, who invaded the territory of the Russian Federation, and completely liberate the occupied area of Kursk Region.” Pyongyang: “The victorious conclusion of the operations for liberating the Kursk area is a victory of justice over injustice and, at the same time, a new chapter of history which demonstrated the highest strategic level of the firm militant friendship between the DPRK and Russia and the alliance and fraternal relations between the peoples of the two countries,” KCNA said.  Useful context: “Russia acknowledged the North Korean deployment for the first time over the weekend and said Ukrainian forces had been expelled from the last Russian village they were holding,” Reuters reports, adding, “Kyiv has denied the claim and said its troops were still operating in some parts of Russian territory.” Recap: “North Korea sent an estimated 14,000 troops, including 3,000 reinforcements to replace its losses,” Reuters writes, citing Ukrainian estimates. “Lacking armoured vehicles and drone warfare experience, [the North Korean soldiers] took heavy casualties but adapted quickly.” Related reading:  “Inside North Korea’s vast operation to help Russia’s war on Ukraine,” which is an outstanding special report published by Reuters earlier this month;  “Shocked by US peace proposal, Ukrainians say they will not accept any formal surrender of Crimea,” AP reported Sunday from Kyiv; And the U.S. may soon sell the Dutch about $2 billion in Tomahawk missiles. The Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency has details, here. Trump 2.0 “I run the country and the world,” President Trump told The Atlantic about this second term in another interview marking 100 days since his inauguration. “The first time, I had two things to do—run the country and survive; I had all these crooked guys,” the president said. “And the second time, I run the country and the world,” he added.  Despite outrage and international law, Trump says he still wants to claim Canada as a U.S. state. In last week’s Time interview, Trump said he’s serious about incorporating Canada and that he wants a legacy of expanding U.S. territory. “We’re taking care of their military,” Trump said. “Were taking care of every aspect of their lives, and we dont need them to make cars for us. In fact, we dont want them to make cars for us. We want to make our own cars. We dont need their lumber. We dont need their energy. We dont need anything from Canada. And I say the only way this thing really works is for Canada to become a state.” The president was then asked, “Do you want to be remembered as a president who expanded American territory?” He responded, “Wouldn’t mind.” Commentary: “Ideological purges reduce deterrence, readiness, and effectiveness. Just ask Stalin.” Bree Fram, a colonel in the U.S. Space Force, notes that Joseph Stalin’s purge of thousands of Red Army officers in the late 1930s helped Adolf Hitler convince himself that invading the Soviet Union was a good idea. The Red Army, and “General Winter,” eventually beat back the Nazi advance, but only after horrific losses magnified by the replacement of experienced officers with politically acceptable ones. She says the U.S. is making a similar mistake in the Trump administration’s effort to kick out thousands of transgender troops. Read on, here.   Two American children were sent to Honduras last week when their mother was deported, the New York Times reported Sunday. The children, ages four and seven, “were put on a flight to Honduras on Friday, the same day another child with U.S. citizenship, a 2-year-old girl, was sent to that country with her undocumented mother.” According to the Times, “Lawyers for both families said the mothers were not given an option to leave their children in the United States before they were deported.” Regarding the two-year-old, a federal judge said Friday, “There is just no good-faith interpretation for what happened to these children.” Related reading:  “Wife of US Coast Guard member arrested over expired visa after security check for military housing” in Naval Air Station at Key West,  AP reported Saturday;  “Trump Officials Weaken Rules Insulating Government Workers From Politics,” the New York Times reported Friday;  “Trump’s fake emergencies are the real crisis,” three legal scholars Serena Mayeri, Amanda Shanor, and Alexander Volokh warned Monday in a commentary published in the Washington Post.  ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The Army made a tank it doesn’t need and can’t use. Now it’s figuring out what to do with it.

 

at 4/27/25 6:00am

As the 101st Airborne Division prepared last year to receive their first M10 Bookers—armored combat vehicles designed specifically for infantry forces—staff planners realized something: eight of the 11 bridges on Fort Campbell would crack under the weight of the “light tank.” It turns out that though the vehicle was initially conceptualized as relatively lightweight—airdroppable by C-130—the twists and turns of the Army requirements process had rendered the tank too heavy to roll across the infrastructure at the infantry-centric Kentucky post, and nobody had thought about that until it was too late. “This is not a story of acquisition gone awry,” Alex Miller, the Army’s chief technology officer, told Defense One. “This is a story of the requirements process creating so much inertia that the Army couldnt get out of its own way, and it just kept rolling and rolling and rolling.” It’s a twist on the classic Pentagon procurement snafu—a program that moves so slowly that it’s outdated by the time it reaches the field. In this case, the Army knew early on that it wasn’t going to be able to make the thing it had set out to make, but it was bound and determined to make something. So it made something it doesn’t actually need.  [[Related Posts]] The Booker is a stark reminder of what can happen when the system is checking the boxes but doing no critical thinking. With the service under pressure to streamline the way it develops new technology, the Army has vowed to turn things around. How did this happen? Pretty soon after 82nd Airborne Division leaders told the Army in 2013 they’d like a new light tank, à la the retired M551 Sheridan, the team working on its requirements hit a snag. The 82nd had asked to be able to airdrop the new vehicle from a C-130 or C-17, but nothing even roughly the size and capability of a Sheridan was going to fit inside a C-130.  “I cant give you a rationale why everything wasn’t backed off,” Miller said. “But the first time that the requirement was sent to the one-stars in September of ‘13, and it didnt look like the [operational needs statement] that came up in July of 2013, the Army should have gone, ‘Stop.’ “ Instead, they resolved to push ahead with what was then the Mobile Protected Firepower program.  The Army Requirements Oversight Council took a look at the 2015 requirements submission and said, never mind, it doesn’t need to be loaded onto a C-130, and actually, don’t worry about airdropping it either. The Joint Requirements Oversight Council signed off. “And thats where you start to see in the story, things starting to crumble,” Miller said. “As all of us know, as soon as you remove the requirement for airdropability, youre no longer actually helping infantry. You are just as maneuverable as a main battle tank at that point, which means you are less maneuverable.” And it didn’t come up again until last year, when Fort Campbell prepared to take possession of the final product. Or if it did, perhaps, the amount of work it would take to go back and change the requirements felt insurmountable. “There is a monster of inertia,” Miller said. “No one wants to stop anything at that point, or certainly go back and re-look, because if you make any edits to the requirement, you have to restart the process.” So the MPF rolled on, frozen in 2016—and saddled with requirements from far older eras. It was required to use the Single Channel Ground and Airborne Radio System, or SINCGARS, first fielded in 1990. The Pentagon has tried to replace SINCGARS, famously spending 15 years and $15 billion only to cancel the Joint Tactical Radio System program. The Army is still working on it. The requirements also locked the Army into buying 504 vehicles, because a 10-percent increase in program cost would trigger a new review of the requirements.  In 2022, Miller said, the requirements were updated—mystifyingly—to say that it doesn’t need to have optionally-manned or autonomous capability, despite the entire Defense Department’s march toward uncrewed technology. “So now you have a vehicle that is the best idea of 2013, that has the best technology limitations of 2013—which are really technology limitations of 2000, because youre trying to be backwards-compatible,” he said. “Youve added boundary conditions that say you cant expand. You cant expand the capabilities because you cant add autonomy. You cant actually add digital technologies. And the process continues to move.” In 2018, the Army decided to station the M10s at Fort Bragg, N.C., with the 82nd; Fort Campbell with the 101st; Fort Carson, Colo., with the 4th Infantry Division; and Fort Johnson, La., at the Joint Readiness Training Center. But the doctrine, training, facilities and other considerations required to onboard a new system hadn’t been finished yet, Miller said. Nor had the National Environmental Policy reviews, “which normally take forever,” and the mobility reviews hadn’t been done either. Posts like Fort Riley, Kansas, or Fort Cavazos, Texas, home armored brigades, are built to enable tanks to move around. But Fort Campbell is all about infantry and Special Forces.  “So now youve got divisions who cant train on their systems. Youve got systems that dont actually meet any current needs, because theyre not airdroppable, and they require C-17s,” Miller said. The sour cherry on top, he added, arrived when the Air Force changed its load restrictions so that the Army could only put one M10 on a C-17, rather than the two the service had counted on. The M10 weighs 42 tons—much lighter than the 70-ton M1 Abrams, but more than twice as much as the 16-ton Sheridan it was to replace.  So now what? There are three M10s operating at Bragg, but the Army isn’t sure it’s going to see through the low-rate production contract it awarded to General Dynamics in 2022, to make up to 96 tanks. The plan was to get to full production in 2025, then 2027. “I know that everyone was trying to do the right thing, and I want to stress that everyone was trying to do the right thing for their piece of the process,” Miller told Defense One, paraphrasing what Army Secretary Dan Driscoll said when he heard the story of the M10. “But, what the secretary, the chief, have said is, ‘OK, ready, take a step back. The process does not exist to serve itself. The process exists for us.’ “ At the moment, the Army is working on a new Abrams variant that will look a lot like what the M10 probably should have been.  “So well have a lighter main battle tank that has all the features that we want: things like autoloader, things like partial autonomy, active protection systems,” Miller said. “What I think the secretary and the chief were holding in reserve is, can that actually satisfy the need?” If they can get the M1A3 into production quickly, with all the new motivation the service has to procure more efficiently, they might be able to off-ramp the M10 without buying a bunch more of them. “So what we will end up doing, I think, is reviewing what that program looks like after the first three units that we bought, and figuring out what the next steps are,” Miller said. “Rather than resting on our laurels and just saying, ‘Were stuck in this process; we need to buy this for 20 or 30 years.’ Because that doesnt make sense.” The process in 2025 is different enough, he stressed, that a mistake like the Booker wouldn’t happen again. Army Chief of Staff Gen. Randy George has used his authority over the AROC to introduce what amounts to another step in the process, but is meant to validate those gold-plated requirements before they get fully locked in. “He goes, ‘I approve this requirement for 120 days. You need to come back and make sure that you can actually do all the things that you said you can do, and do it at the price point that provides the best value to the Army,’ “ Miller said. If it can’t, it’s toast. And the Army wants to get better at “no.” “On the kick of fixing the acquisition and procurement process in total, this is a case study on, ‘Wow, we really have got to fix this’,” Miller said. “We are just willing to go, ‘Hey, were not doing this anymore.” ]]

[Category: Policy]

— The Army has rolled out a generative AI workspace to improve daily operations

 

at 4/26/25 6:00am

The Armys new generative-AI workspace enables users to apply large language models to daily tasks and boost productivity. But it takes a lot of compute power and storage, so the service has also been working to streamline how it handles cloud services and contracts.  “Weve been working to bring on something we call the Army Enterprise LLM Workspace, which is how we look at LLM usage in a safe way at the [Impact Level 5] for our warfighters” and in daily office operations, Gabriele Chiulli, the chief technology officer for the Army’s Enterprise Cloud Management Agency, told Defense One.  For example, LLMs were used to rip through the tedious task of reclassifying personnel descriptions, which includes defining and aligning job duties, experience, and backgrounds.  The Army was able to formulate about 300,000 personnel descriptions in a week using LLMs, Chiulli said. It would take a human about 10 minutes to review each description, which would amount to about 50,000 hours or 5.7 years of working around the clock.  Last year, the Army previewed plans for a generative AI pilot program. But the service had already noted a spike in cloud computing costs as more people used AI tools and services.  [[Related Posts]] For example, an Army command was tasked with analyzing a problem set with national-level data within a 48-hour timeframe. They used generative AI to complete the task and it resulted in a big cloud computing bill and alerted the service to the need for “guardrails” to keep costs in check, Army tech leaders told reporters earlier this year.  “How we control costs is really important. Because what we certainly dont want to end up with is a massive cloud compute bill,” said Jennifer Swanson, deputy assistant secretary of the Army for data, engineering, and software.  In that cost-cutting spirit, the Army is simplifying its cloud contracting by consolidating services done by the same provider on the same contract. The service awarded Oracle “a firm-fixed price task order through the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability (JWCC) contract to provide the U.S. Army’s Enterprise Cloud Management Agency (ECMA) with cloud compute and storage services,” according to an April 15 news release.  Without everything on JWCC, “it would be a square peg in a round hole to take an Oracle product and run it in a different cloud. Now, it works seamlessly, much more supported, much more secure when youre running Oracle in Oracle, which we can do through the JWCC contract,” Kim Lynch, Oracle’s executive vice president for its defense and Intelligence business, told Defense One. The move aims to streamline cloud management, enhance security, and reduce costs—in some cases up to 50 percent, Chiulli said. For example, one program’s bill has been cut nearly in half. “Were talking [about] something that was $1 million a month is now like $600,000 a month from a finance perspective because of some of the changes that we made,” he said.  “If we have three separate contracts…each one of these contracts has like one or two people that have to manage it—all those different back-end processes,” he said. “Now, we only have to have one teams worth of people to manage this stuff. So it really was about becoming really efficient from a personnel perspective too.” ]]

[Category: Defense Systems]

— New White House order makes it easier to fire probationary employees

 

at 4/25/25 12:00pm

President Donald Trump on Thursday issued an executive order expanding the reasons agencies may fire probationary employees, a group the administration has sought to dismiss en masse as part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce.  Workers in their probationary periods are generally those who have been hired or promoted within the past year or two. While they have fewer civil service job protections, they can only be dismissed for reasons of performance or conduct.  Recently, several judges have ordered the Trump administration to reinstate thousands of probationary employees fired for alleged "poor performance” findings that one judge called “a total sham.” Those orders have since been paused.  Thursday’s executive order says that agency chiefs may dismiss probationary workers recently hired by the federal government by declaring that the agency does not need them to meet its needs, advance its interests, or improve its efficiency. The directive also requires agencies to affirm the need for a probationary employee in order to retain them at the end of their term.  “For example, when the last workday is a Friday and the anniversary date is the following Monday, a probationer will be separated before the end of the tour of duty on Friday if their agency does not make the requisite certification that their continued appointment advances the public interest,” according to the order.  This latter step follows proposals that predate Trump’s second term. In 2023, the Office of Personnel Management had recommended that supervisors should decide whether to keep or fire a probationary worker.  The order also requires agencies to identify all of their employees in probationary periods that end in 90 or more days from its enactment. It directs agency leaders to certify in writing that their continued employment would advance the public interest.  Earlier this week, a federal judge ordered agencies to inform their fired probationary workers that they were not removed due to their performance. The Office of Special Counsel, whose head Trump recently fired, also decided to drop the cases of such terminated employees who had appealed their firings to the watchdog agency. ]]

[Category: Policy]

— Ideological purges reduce deterrence, readiness, and effectiveness. Just ask Stalin

 

at 4/25/25 10:57am

History is replete with cautionary tales about the dangers of ideological purges, particularly when they target national-security institutions. One of the starkest examples comes from the Soviet Union, when Joseph Stalin’s purges gutted the Red Army on the eve of World War II. Now the United States faces a potentially parallel crisis: the purge of transgender service members from the military amid rising tensions with China and Russia. The consequences for national security ripple far beyond the careers of a few thousand troops. In 1937 and 1938, the Great Terror swept through the Soviet military. More than 24,000 officers were discharged, and nearly 10,000 were arrested. Stalin targeted officers based on their belonging to perceived “dangerous” groups, rather than any actual disloyalty. The loss of senior leaders cost the Red Army thousands of cumulative years of institutional experience, forcing Stalin to replace seasoned generals with untested officers promoted for their political reliability rather than their military competence. Historian David Glantz writes that Stalin’s paranoia “impelled him to stifle original thought within the military institutions and inexorably bend the armed forces to his will…The bloodletting that ensued tore the brain from the Red Army, smashed its morale, stifled any spark of original thought and left a magnificent hollow military establishment, riper for catastrophic defeat.” This hollowing-out of leadership eroded deterrence. At the Nuremberg Trials after the war, German Field Marshal Wilhelm Keitel testified that many generals warned Hitler not to attack the Soviets, arguing the Red Army was still a formidable force. But Hitler dismissed these concerns, saying: “The first-class high-ranking officers were wiped out by Stalin in 1937, and the new generation cannot yet provide the brains they need.” And so, in 1941, Germany launched its invasion. Despite the Red Army’s superior numbers and firepower, its lack of effective leaders turned what could have been a formidable defense into a series of catastrophic defeats. Understaffing in key command positions, coupled with a culture of fear that stifled initiative, resulted in avoidable tactical blunders. Often paralyzed in their response to the German invasion, Soviet troops were unwilling or unable to make independent battlefield decisions. This culture of paranoia and obedience, along with plunging morale, cost the Soviet Union millions of lives and nearly the war. A dangerous parallel Though the scale of the Great Terror dwarfs the trans ban, the United States is at risk of repeating Stalin’s blunder. Thousands of transgender troops, most with more than a decade in uniform, currently serve in the U.S. armed forces. Like Stalin’s Red Army officers, they are being expelled not for any performance failures, but solely because of ideology. The current administration claims, without evidence, that transgender people are “incompatible with the high mental and physical standards necessary for military service.” Officials have been unable to back up these claims, even when challenged in court. “Any evidence that such service over the past four years harmed any of the military’s inarguably critical aims would be front and center. But there is none,” wrote Judge Benjamin Settle, one of three U.S. District Court judges who have placed injunctions on the administrations ban. Another is Judge Ana Reyes, who declared, “Plaintiff’s service records alone are Exhibit A for the proposition that transgender persons can have the warrior ethos, physical and mental health, selflessness, honor, integrity, and discipline to ensure military excellence. Defendants agree…Plaintiffs, they acknowledge, have ‘made America safer.’ So why discharge them and other decorated soldiers? Crickets from Defendants on this key question.” Despite the decisions, the government is determined to press forward; it has appealed each case and, on Thursday, asked the Supreme Court to clear the way for its ban. The removal of so many dedicated, skilled, and battle-tested personnel can only reduce readiness. Many transgender troops are senior officers and non-commissioned officers who are leading from the front or training and developing the next generation of service members. Take Ken Ochoa, a warrant officer and all-source intelligence technician who served as one of the first transgender drill sergeants, then as an instructor for the intelligence analyst Advanced Leaders Course. Ken, who has previously deployed to Afghanistan, returned just this month from a deployment supporting Operation Inherent Resolve. Or Lt. Cmdr. Kris Moore, who enlisted in 2005 and gained an appointment to the Naval Academy in the class of 2014. Kris is a surface warfare officer with multiple deployments who holds a master’s degree in education and leadership. He recently returned from an operational deployment, which followed his assignment to instruct cadets at the Academy. Master Sergeant Jayce Saldivar, one of the first cyber operators selected for transfer to the Space Force, is the first senior enlisted leader at the Space Force’s officer Joint Professional Military Education program at Johns Hopkins University. Jayce helps develop the future senior leaders of the service into consummate professionals who can direct space warfare and lead their people to new heights. The loss of such trained personnel means their replacements will be less experienced, just as Stalin was forced to promote unqualified officers to fill gaps. Military readiness is not just about numbers—it is about experience, training, and trust. Replacing seasoned professionals with less-prepared individuals weakens operational effectiveness. Beyond the loss of talent, the purge undermines morale across the armed forces. Those who saw transgender troops as friends and teammates now see holes in their unit manning. As well, forcing out qualified transgender personnel sends the message that even dedicated professionals can be dismissed for reasons completely unrelated to their capability—hardly encouragement to pursue a long-term military career. And with nearly 30 percent of Gen Z adults aged 18-25 identifying as members of the LGBTQ+ community, we have to wonder where new recruits will come from. Both the Soviet and U.S. cases illustrate how ideology can override strategic logic, leading to weakened armed forces at moments of great geopolitical tension. Indeed, the timing of this policy shift could hardly be worse. As the U.S. faces an increasingly aggressive China in the Pacific and continued Russian expansionism in Ukraine, with increasingly high-technology threats such as drones, hypersonic missiles, and “dogfighting” satellites, the military needs every capable service member it can retain. And just as Hitler saw an opportunity in Stalin’s weakened Red Army, America’s adversaries may view this internal instability as a sign of vulnerability. Transgender service members have proven their worth time and again. Removing them from the military is not only an attack on them, but a direct threat to national security. In a time of growing global instability, the U.S. military cannot afford to weaken itself by sidelining dedicated professionals, stifling diversity of thought and a willingness to provide best military advice over “yes, sir”, and reducing the pool of Americans willing and able to serve. It is essential that our national defense remain guided by strategic necessity, not ideology. The views presented in this piece are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Defense Department or the United States government. Bree Fram is a colonel and astronautical engineer in the U.S. Space Force. She is stationed at the Pentagon and is one of the highest-ranking transgender service members in the military. ]]

[Category: Ideas]

— The D Brief: India-Pakistan tensions rise; China’s ‘ChatGPT for robots’; Golden Dome price tag; Robot-wingman reversal; And a bit more.

 

at 4/25/25 9:19am

Developing: India-Pakistan tensions are rising after deadly terror attack. Islamabad has denied responsibility for the April 22 attack that killed 26 mostly Indian tourists in an India-controlled Himalayan region, but the nations have nevertheless edged toward war; they have “downgraded diplomatic and trade ties, closed the main border crossing and revoked visas for each other’s nationals,” the Associated Press reported Thursday from New Delhi. China’s military aims to harness the coming “ChatGPT for robotics.” Several burgeoning techniques are enabling researchers and companies to train robots to be far more flexible, Josh Baughman and Peter W. Singer report in the latest edition of The China Intelligence.  “A key example is vision-language-action models, which ingest images, data, and information from a robot’s internal sensors, the degree of rotation of different joints, and the positions of actuators. This enables robots to adapt and learn from their environment rapidly, creating a level of “common sense.” Now the People’s Liberation Army and its industry supporters are looking to use these advances to make humanoid robots for the battlefield. Read on, here. Welcome to this Friday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 1960, Navy submarine USS Triton completed the world’s first submerged circumnavigation. Even more Hegseth comms problems Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth used an unsecured internet line to access the message app Signal from his office inside the Pentagon, the Associated Press reported Thursday, extending an already troublesome narrative of lax security protocols that would cost most other personnel in the U.S. military their jobs.  Rewind: Hegseth drew unwanted attention last month after sharing sensitive details of an ongoing Middle East military operation in a thread on Signal that inadvertently included journalist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic. Hegseth’s texts in that thread—allegedly taken from the military’s top commander in the Middle East, who shared the information on a classified system—seemed to violate Pentagon security protocols for information sharing. But in the weeks since, Hegseth reportedly shared similar information with his wife and brother over Signal as well, drawing additional unwanted attention to his first 100 days running the Defense Department under President Trump.  Why it matters: “The existence of the unsecured internet connection…raises the possibility that sensitive defense information could have been put at risk of potential hacking or surveillance,” Tara Copp of AP writes. What’s more, “A ‘dirty’ line—just like any public internet connection—also may lack the recordkeeping compliance required by federal law,” a senior U.S. official said.  Worth noting: The Pentagon’s acting inspector general has launched an investigation into Hegseth’s use of Signal during the March episode, as requested by the chair and ranking members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Pentagon reax: Hegseth’s “use of communications systems and channels is classified,” spokesman Sean Parnell told AP. He added, “we can confirm that the Secretary has never used and does not currently use Signal on his government computer.” (For what it’s worth, AP reported Hegseth accessed Signal from a personal computer.) But that’s not all. “Hegseth’s personal phone number, the one used in a recent Signal chat, was easily accessible on the internet and public apps as recently as March, potentially exposing national security secrets to foreign adversaries,” the New York Times reported Friday, citing cybersecurity analysts and the former director of the National Counterintelligence and Security Center.  Fine print: “It has now become routine for government officials to keep their personal cellphones when they enter office, several defense and security officials said in interviews. But they are not supposed to use them for official business, as Mr. Hegseth did.” Read more at the Times, here.  Hegseth also accused Vice Chair of the Joint Chiefs ​​Adm. Christopher Grady of leaking stories to the press last month, the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday. “I’ll hook you up to a f—ing polygraph!” Hegseth shouted at Grady, who was then the acting Joint Chiefs Chairman. According to the Journal, “Grady was never subjected to a polygraph, and Hegseth would go on to accuse a number of other people for the leak…But for Hegseth, the episode marked a turning point in an already rocky tenure.” Story (gift link), here.  Update: Hegseth’s chief of staff Joe Kasper is leaving the Pentagon, not just moving to a different post inside the building, Politico reported Thursday.  Background: “A former longtime chief of staff to indicted Rep. Duncan Hunter, Kasper was a leading figure in the firings of senior adviser Dan Caldwell, Hegseth deputy chief of staff Darin Selnick and Colin Carroll, the chief of staff to Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg. The trio were ousted last week in a leak investigation,” Daniel Lippman and Jack Detsch write. Kasper told Politico he’s currently “planning to go back to government relations and consulting.” USA Today has more. And Thursday was “bring your child to work day” at the Pentagon, whose military photographers snapped and shared about 65 images of the occasion online at DVIDS. Organizers also led the children into seats inside the briefing room where Deputy Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson held “a packed press briefing with the most adorable reporters!” as external engagement official Tami Radabaugh posted to social media afterward.  “The Pentagon has now had as many press conferences for kids as they have for the actual press,” Konstantin Toropin of Military.com noted on Day 95 of the Trump-Vance administration. What does Hegseth’s Friday look like? He’s traveling to the U.S.-Mexico border strip known as the Roosevelt Reservation, which was recently transferred to U.S. military control. “We will fully SEAL the border & REPEL all illegals attempting to cross,” he wrote on social media.  Additional reading:  “Pentagon to resume medical care for transgender troops,” Politico reported Thursday following a federal appeals court decision; The Hill has similar coverage, here; “Inside the Fiasco at the National Security Council,” via Isaac Stanley-Becker writing Thursday for The Atlantic; “Paranoid Hegseth Plasters Pentagon With Photos of Controversial Wife,” The Daily Beast reported Friday; And “Jimmy Kimmel Mocks Pete Hegseth’s Rumored Pentagon Makeup Studio,” the New York Times reported in its “best of late night” segment. Here’s one of Kimmel’s jokes about Hegseth’s camera-shy predecessor: “Lloyd Austin, he is a four-star general. He was the previous secretary of defense. You ever seen him before? No. You know why? He was inside the Pentagon doing his job; he was not on TV.” Around the Defense Department Developing: We may have our first “Golden Dome” price tag. Lawmakers want $150 billion in additional defense spending in their reconciliation bill this year, and at least $27 billion of it could go towards the Trump administration’s sprawling space-based missile defense project, Reuters reported Thursday. The measure “will be in addition to the approved $886 billion national security budget for 2025,” Mike Stone writes.  The Golden Dome money is for “more missile interceptors and the purchase of Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) antiballistic missile batteries,” Stone reports.  “This is part of a plan to prevent war,” said Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  Additional allotments in the bill:  “$29 billion for the procurement of 14 new ships”; $11 billion for aircraft, including “the purchase of about 40 Boeing Co F-15EX fighter jets”; Around $20 billion for munitions production;  “$14 billion to fund the adoption of artificial intelligence and to expand the production of new low-cost weapons”; $6 billion in weapons for U.S. forces in the Pacific region;  $5 billion for autonomous systems, and more. The USAF has changed tack on its next batch of robot wingmen. Now it’s seeking simpler and cheaper CCAs rather than more capable and expensive ones, Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, director of Air Force force design, integration, and wargaming said Tuesday during an event hosted by the Air & Space Forces Association. And those drones could find themselves flying along not just fighter jets but the E-7 radar plane and B-21 bomber. Defense One’s Audrey Decker has a bit more, here.   The projected cost of America’s nuclear arsenal has risen again, CBO says. The Congressional Budget Office says its current estimate of the cost to operate, sustain, modernize, and replace today’s nuclear weapons over the next decade is $190 billion—about one-quarter—more than last year’s estimate of $756 billion for 2023–32. “Of that amount, $157 billion comes from differences in CBOs current and 2023 estimates of budgeted amounts for nuclear forces, and $33 billion comes from differences in the agencys estimates of potential additional costs based on historical cost growth.” More, here. Additional reading:  “DIU barrels ahead with tri-regional expansion plans,” Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams reported Thursday;  And “The Pentagon Can’t Be Run Like a Business,” former Assistant Secretary of Defense for Strategy, Plans, and Capabilities Mara Karlin writes this week in Foreign Affairs. Trump 2.0 New: Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts to the U.S. government didn’t account for the costs of firing workers, the New York Times reports.  And those costs could eat up $135 billion of his $150 billion in claimed savings, which is “about 15 percent of the $1 trillion he pledged to save, less than 8 percent of the $2 trillion in savings he had originally promised and a fraction of the nearly $7 trillion the federal government spent in the 2024 fiscal year,” Elizabeth Williamson reported Thursday for the Times.   Expert reax: “Not only is Musk vastly overinflating the money he has saved, he is not accounting for the exponentially larger waste that he is creating,” said Max Stier, the chief executive of the Partnership for Public Service, which arrived at the $135 billion price tag. “He’s inflicted these costs on the American people, who will pay them for many years to come.” Reminder: DOGE’s cuts to the IRS are expected to reduce tax revenues by hundreds of billions of dollars.  White House reax: “Doing nothing has a cost, too, and these so-called experts and groups are conveniently absent when looking at the costs of doing nothing,” spokesman Harrison W. Fields told the Times. Read more (gift link), here.  Additional reading:  “As Tesla profits plunge 71%, Elon Musk says hell spend less time on DOGE,” NPR reported Wednesday;  “Trump Takes a Major Step Toward Seabed Mining in International Waters,” the Times reported Thursday;  And ICYMI, “Trump Is Attempting to Use Wartime Powers in the United States,” Katherine Yon Ebright and Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center for Justice explained Thursday for The Atlantic. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The AI arms race will be won on mathematical proof

 

at 4/25/25 6:56am

This commentary is published in coordination with the 2025 Global Security Forum, of which Defense One is a media partner. The AI-powered weapons and systems that the Pentagon is racing to build will come with a significant vulnerability: our inability to determine how they will behave under real battlefield conditions. The Defense Department, National Security Agency, and Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency call this the “software understanding gap.” Increasingly, users do not understand the digital building blocks of their systems, which leads to an inability to predict, verify, and secure their systems’ actions. Without a deeper understanding of our most complex software, the United States’ world-class arsenal will be unreliable across modern battlefields, and adversaries may be emboldened to exploit those vulnerabilities. So how do we ensure these autonomous systems perform as needed? Whereas traditional military hardware was designed to operate within clear and defined boundaries, AI-driven systems employ automated decision-making that learns and adapts, making them susceptible to manipulation or error beyond human anticipation. Conventional testing methods that sufficed for deterministic systems with finite failure modes, such as a jet engine or a radar system, are woefully inadequate for the complexities of AI. No amount of simulation or red-teaming can secure a system that is learning and adapting faster than any human can follow—especially in the face of an adversary intent on targeting its blind spots. We need something more robust and sophisticated than testing. We need mathematical proof. Testing is akin to checking each link in a chain to make sure they’re strong. This may work well for a few hundred links, but as the number of links increases, the likelihood that you miss a weakness increases as well. Mathematical proof takes a different approach. Instead of checking links one by one, proofs show that the entire chain is unbreakable—no matter how long it stretches. A proof starts by defining the fundamental rules: what the chain is made of, how much force it must withstand, and how it is connected. Once these assumptions are established, the proof confirms the first link is strong, then follows a logical progression to ensure that every connected link must also hold. Whether the chain is ten links long or an infinite number of links, the proof guarantees that there are no weak points. That is why proof is essential for AI-driven military systems. Testing can tell us if a system works under the conditions created in the test environment. But testing alone cannot cover every battlefield, cyberattack, or possible manipulation. A proof guarantees that no matter what conditions the system faces—even the ones not yet imagined—it will behave as intended. It produces justifiable confidence. Complete confidence in software systems is not theoretical—it has been proven. DARPA showed this in its High-Assurance Cyber Military Systems program, where researchers used mathematical proof to make a quadcopter’s flight software unbreakable. After implementing these guarantees, DARPA tried to hack it—bringing in expert teams whose best efforts could not compromise its defenses. The lesson was clear: mathematically verified software does not just resist attacks, it eliminates entire classes of vulnerabilities. The private sector has reached the same conclusion. Amazon Web Services applies mathematical reasoning to its cloud infrastructure, not only to strengthen security, but to build better systems by ensuring faster deployment, fewer errors, and more reliable performance. The takeaway is simple: proof does not just prevent failure, it drives innovation. Now we must bring this level of certainty to the AI-powered systems that are defining modern warfare. Consider the stakes: an autonomous air defense system in the Taiwan Strait detects an incoming missile. The system has mere seconds to classify and neutralize the threat. If China can surreptitiously corrupt sensor data by exploiting an undiscovered flaw, it could quickly neutralize one of the most important components of Taiwan’s defense. The same holds true for AI-driven cyber and electronic warfare. If adversaries can manipulate battlefield signals in ways our algorithms cannot recognize, entire operations could be compromised. These scenarios underscore a stark reality: without mathematical guarantees, we are entrusting our national defense to systems that could fail unpredictably and with disastrous consequences. China is setting the pace in autonomous warfare. The People’s Liberation Army has placed AI-driven military systems at the center of its modernization strategy—called “intelligentized warfare”—developing autonomous weapons, cyber tools, and electronic attack capabilities with speed. The U.S. is moving just as fast, but speed alone is not enough. China’s closed ecosystem, where the government can scrutinize every line of code, improves its confidence in its capabilities. The United States, with its open and fragmented technology supply chain, faces a harder problem. And it must be met with more sophisticated tools. Modern conflicts will not be won by those who simply build the most capable AI-powered systems. It will be won by those who can definitively prove theirs will work when the stakes are highest. The U.S. and its allies cannot afford to deploy autonomous systems without mathematical rigor. This is not just a testing problem; it’s a national security imperative. The defense community must act now to ensure that mathematical proof is powering every system we build. Anything less is a bet we cannot afford to take. Anjana Rajan served as the Assistant National Cyber Director for Technology Security at the White House from 2022 to 2025. Jonathan Ring served as the Deputy Assistant National Cyber Director for Technology Security at the White House from 2022 to 2025. ]]

[Category: Ideas]

— Next wave of Air Force drone wingmen could be cheaper, official says

 

at 4/24/25 5:48pm

The Air Force’s next batch of Collaborative Combat Aircraft will likely be on the “low-end” for both cost and capability, a service official said Tuesday—not more advanced than the first, as earlier statements had suggested. Work is already underway on “increment two” of the CCA program, which then-Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall had previously described as more advanced and expensive than “increment one.” But now officials are suggesting that future drones will be more budget-friendly.  “I think youll see a range of options from low-end to potentially more exquisite. I tend to think that its probably going to be closer to this low-end thing when we start looking at further CCA increments,” Maj. Gen. Joseph Kunkel, director of Air Force force design, integration, and wargaming said Tuesday during an event hosted by the Air & Space Forces Association.  Officials recently announced that a sixth-generation fighter jet, the F-47, will be joining the fleet—which may reduce both the need and funds available for stealthy, exquisite CCAs.  The first prototypes in increment one are set to fly this summer; they’re largely thought of as missile carriers for manned fighters, at a price point of $25 to $30 million each. The service is still figuring out what it wants in increment two, but has previously discussed new mission sets like electronic attack, resilient sensing, and carrying different types of weapons. CCAs are envisioned as companions to Air Force fighter jets like the F-35, F-22, and future F-47, but Kunkel said the service is now considering integrating CCAs with more aircraft—including the E-7 Wedgetail radar plane and B-21 Raider bomber—as well as having CCAs fight on their own.  The drones are a key part of the broader Next Generation Air Dominance family of systems, centered around the F-47. The service announced in March that Boeing will build the next-gen fighter, after a year of deliberation over what would be needed to win in a future fight.  Looking back, Kunkel said the service “probably didnt need to do the analysis,” because leaders ended up at the same conclusion: air superiority is essential and it changes the fight.  The F-47 “allows us to get places, allows the joint force to get places where it otherwise couldnt. It allows us to move closer to the adversary. It allows us to counter the adversary in ways we can’t. The F-47 is going to be fantastic, bringing game-changing capabilities,” he said. The F-47 announcement also solidifies the new administration’s “confidence” in the Air Force, Kunkel said, as the Pentagon undergoes a major budget shakeup. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed the services to find ways to cut 8% from their budgets so that money could be redirected to new priorities, a process Air Force officials have described as painful. But service officials are hopeful the 8% cut will enable a broader reallocation of defense spending—potentially giving the Air Force a bigger piece of the budget.  “The F-47 I think, is a perfect example of a warwinning story, a coherent narrative, a cohesive, ‘Hey, this is how we win.’ This is how the joint force wins with Air Force capabilities, [and] were going to see the 8% buys back into that,” Kunkel said. “This 8% cut drill is going to be good for the Air Force because its the only way were going to be able to reallocate the top line within the department.” ]]

[Category: Science & Tech]

— DIU barrels ahead with tri-regional expansion plans

 

at 4/24/25 5:39pm

The Pentagon’s innovation arm wants to expand its regional footprint, with new hubzones in Kentucky, Minnesota, and Montana to boost outreach with tech companies.  “Were really humbled and excited by the opportunity at DIU to be that on ramp for commercial and dual-use technology into the department. And one of the ways that we do that is by having people out in the regions,” Liz Young McNally, the Defense Innovation Unit’s deputy director for commercial operations, said Wednesday at the Apex Defense forum.  “We also have regional folks as well in places like Pittsburgh and New York and other places…so that we can better scout what commercial technology exists and help companies figure out how they can get through the department.” The agency released a “sources sought” memo Wednesday to garner market research on the proposed new locations. “The recipients of these awards will be expected to provide direction to improve the ways in which non-traditional companies and talent can work with the Department of Defense and grow regional defense innovation ecosystems in the state,” the memo states. “Each hub will oversee the execution of projects and initiatives that address barriers for working with the DOD, and enhance the defense innovation base through regionally-driven efforts. The hubs will also be required to coordinate with other OnRamp Hubs across the nation and with broader DIU and US government organizations.” [[Related Posts]] The OnRamp hubs will act as a “front door” to the Pentagon with a “physical space for mentoring, convening events, and programming,” while also providing services such as cyber hardening and “access to research and development or testing and evaluation” among other qualities, according to the memo. Since its inception in 2015, DIU has grown in size and influence when it comes to how the Pentagon buys and fields commercial technologies.   The agency is headquartered in Mountain View, Calif., but has regional offices in Austin, Texas, Boston, Chicago, and Washington, D.C. There are also on-ramp hubs in Arizona, Hawaii, Kansas, Ohio, and Washington state. ]]

[Category: Business]

— China’s military aims to harness the coming ‘ChatGPT for robotics’

 

at 4/24/25 2:02pm

This week, more than 12,000 human runners raced 21 robots through the streets of Beijing in what was billed as the “first showdown between humanoid robots and brave human participants.” Humanity won this round, with the top human, a racer from Ethiopia, taking first place in the Beijing E-Town Half Marathon with a time of 1:02:36. Yet the fastest humanoid robot, the Tiangong Ultra, did complete the 13-mile run at a respectable 2:40 clip, pointing to a future where human-like machines may not just match, but soon race ahead of humans.  That same future may lie not too far away in warfare as well, if the recent efforts of the Chinese defense industrial complex prove successful.  A world of human-like robots has long been a staple of science fiction, extending from their first mention in Karel Čapeks play, R.U.R. (Rossums Universal Robots), to the Terminator movies, and beyond. Like so much in technology now, this myth is rapidly approaching reality, as scientists and CEOs are beginning to see the hardware of robots as the natural destination of AI software, allowing machine intelligence to interact and learn from the real world, not just data sets. Duke University roboticist Boyuan Chen puts it this way: “I believe that intelligence can’t be born without having the perspective of physical embodiments.” Recent years have witnessed an unprecedented surge in robotics capabilities, driven by the transformative power of AI. Academic researchers, startups, and major tech firms worldwide are harnessing large language models, speech synthesis, and image recognition. "The algorithms can transfer, which is powering this renaissance of robotics,” Covariant CEO Peter Chen told The Economist. Aiding this is the breakthrough of multimodal models, which can handle diverse inputs—text, images, and audio—and convert them into new formats. A key example is vision-language-action models, which ingest images, data, and information from a robot’s internal sensors, the degree of rotation of different joints, and the positions of actuators. This enables robots to adapt and learn from their environment rapidly, creating a level of “common sense” known as “embodied AI.” For example, a robot equipped with vision-language-action models might be able to pick up a piece of fruit on a table of many objects, even if not specifically trained for that task. And engineers can ask why it chose the fruit, allowing rapid adjustments. Another breakthrough, called "diffusion policy," is enabling researchers to train robots more quickly than ever. Originally developed for AI image generation and refined by the Toyota Research Institute, this method builds on taught actions to randomly generate and refine new movements, enabling a robot to adapt to unfamiliar situations. Researchers who have applied diffusion to hundreds of tasks are now integrating them into a large behavior model—a sort of LLM for the physical world. New skills can then be transmitted wirelessly between robots through “fleet learning,” accelerating training yet again. The result is that many feel we are on the edge of an explosion in the use of robotics. “The ChatGPT moment for general robotics is just around the corner,” Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang recently said. But if robots are to be truly useful, they must be able to seamlessly integrate into a world designed for humans, from the environments we work in to the tools and weapons we wield—in a word, be humanoid. Unlike specialized automata good for pre-designed tasks and limited settings, robotic bipeds with a head and two arms can adjust to missions from moving supplies to equipment maintenance to infantry. “Humanoid robots are the jewel in the crown of the robotics industry, integrating advanced technologies such as artificial intelligence, high-end manufacturing, and new materials,” EX Robot CEO Li Boyang said at the 2024 Summer Davos Forum. Chinas strategic robotic push Recognizing this potential, China is aggressively pursuing humanoid robotics, driven by President Xi Jinpings call for "new quality productive forces." (新质生产力) Last year, a group of seven ministries led by the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology issued a list of innovative products that would be part of these “new quality products”; first on the list was humanoid robots. The Ministry of Industry and Information Technology also published a "Guiding Opinions on the Innovative Development of Humanoid Robots," which for the first time gave China a “comprehensive and clear strategic planning and deployment for the development of humanoid robots, becoming a leading document for the development of the industry.” Last year’s inaugural Chinese Humanoid Robot Industry Conference and Embodied AI Summit in Beijing attracted more than 1,200 industrial stakeholders and practitioners. That number is a powerful illustration of China’s heft in the field, with Morgan Stanley reporting that "Chinese companies hold a 63 percent share of the global humanoid robot supply chain." The Beijing Humanoid Robot Innovation Center, led by UBTECH, exemplifies this commitment. Their “Tiangong” [天工] robot has 3D vision, high-precision inertial measurement units, and CPUs capable of 550 trillion operations per second—all of which have allowed it to solve motion-control challenges that have bedeviled many other robots. The 5-foot-4, 95-pound robot can run up to 12 kmph and traverse various terrains with ease, including slopes, stairs, grass, gravel, and sand. The center’s chief technology officer, Xiong Youjun, said Tiangong aims to be an open-source platform for hardware and software—and, ultimately, the global leader of embodied intelligence. Military advantages PLA strategists see three primary advantages to deploying such humanoid robots on the battlefield. First, versatility. “Compared with other unmanned systems, humanoid robots are closer to humans in shape and structure, can simulate various human activities, better realize human-computer interaction, and are more suitable for replacing humans to complete complex tasks,” writes Wang Yonghua, a scholar with the Operational Theories and Regulations Department of the Academy of Military Science, the PLA’s top research institute. Other researchers from the National University of Defense Technology echoed this in the article " “Do the Rapidly Evolving Humanoid Robots Dream of Going to the Battlefield?” They note that battlefield environments increasingly reflect human-centric settings, such as towns, industrial zones, and farms, and that humanoid robots can thus interact seamlessly with various systems and simulate human operation effectively in these realms. This versatility will only grow with AI. PLA Daily author Zhang Yicheng has written, the new generation of humanoid robots now features a “brain” that can perceive complex scenarios, make decisions, and plan, along with a “cerebellum” that enables precise control of limb movements. Second, scalability. One of the primary lessons that the PLA has taken from the Ukraine war is the importance of rapidly increasing capabilities and the success of drone swarms. In the article entitled,  “It Will Profoundly Change the Form of Future Warfare,” writers for the China Association for Science and Technology, state  that, “Quantity is an important aspect that affects combat effectiveness. The effect and power of a humanoid robot in attacking actions are very limited, but the large-scale use of humanoid robots to form clusters can achieve a leap in attack capabilities.” Finally, survivability. As PLA Daily author Zhang Yicheng writes, humanoid robots can not only fight alongside humans and assist in completing various tasks but also serve as decoys to draw enemy fire, even willingly "sacrificing" themselves to protect humans. Another author envisions a particular task for this robotic cannon fodder: “The biggest obstacle for China to complete the great cause of reunification in the future is the risk of personnel losses in the street fighting on the island of Taiwan.” There is also a recognition that these advantages are just the start. As the Chinese Ministry of National Defense article entitled “Pay Attention to the Military Application of Humanoid Robots” summed, “Just like the Wright brothers flying, it was impossible to imagine how useful airplanes would be in war at that time, but with the improvement of aircraft performance and the expansion of the scope of application, combat methods such as aerial bombing were soon born. Obstacles and challenges The PLA acknowledges several challenges. Trust is a major concern, with worries about the reliability and controllability of AI-powered robots, particularly in combat. Articles in PLA Daily, for example, have noted how AI does not understand "what it is doing" and has falsified information with both skill and confidence. Vulnerabilities to adversarial hacking and data pollution are also a concern. In the article “Beware of Combat Robots’ Counterattack” [警惕战斗机器人“反戈一击], one PLA author even envisioned a scenario where humanoid robots “suddenly turn their guns on their own people, causing heavy losses to their own side and chaos.” PLA authors also know their robots also face Moravecs Paradox. Named after Canadian roboticist Hans Moravec, this is the phenomenon that, while complex machines can perform calculations no human can master, they can struggle with tasks intuitive to a one-year-old child. War is inherently unpredictable, so Chinese authors note that humanoid robotics will need to gain the robotic equivalent of common sense, if they are to “act independently without human intervention, and complete combat tasks just like humans.” Finally, there are hardware limitations. In attributes such as weight, height, and speed, Chinese humanoid robot manufacturers appear to be on par with their international counterparts. However, one Chinese analyst wrote that Chinese robotics firms lag their global rivals in hardware precision, durability, and reliability. The upcoming race in Beijing is viewed as a chance to change that perception. If the United States hopes to keep up with this accelerating pace of humanoid robots, it must speed up its own research and development; work with partners and allies to ensure robust safeguards and ethical guidelines for autonomous weapons; invest in resilient hardware and secure communication networks; and focus on efficient training and hardware development for military-specific uses. A world is coming in which humanoid robots don’t just run alongside humans, but also fight alongside them in war. The next decade may determine which nation those machines serve. Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the Air University, the Department of the Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other U.S. government agency. ]]

[Category: Science & Tech]

— The D Brief: WH pressures Ukraine; Hegseth latest; Rare-earths squeeze; Boeing’s no-loss quarter; And a bit more.

 

at 4/24/25 9:20am

After at least a week of publicly threatening to abandon Ukraine, the Trump White House is pushing Kyiv to accept an apparently lopsided, U.S.-brokered peace deal that includes recognition of Russia’s illegal 2014 annexation of Crimea, among other sacrifices—but little to no concessions for Russian President Vladimir Putin, Defense One’s Patrick Tucker reports.  “If [Ukraine] wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired?” Trump wrote incorrectly on social media Wednesday. Indeed, “At least one Ukrainian serviceman was killed, and dozens were detained or assaulted. [Putin’s invasion], widely condemned by the international community, violated international law,” the Kyiv Independent reminded readers Wednesday.  “There is nothing to talk about” regarding the latest White House plan,  Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said at a press briefing in Kyiv on Tuesday. Putin’s invasion “violated our Constitution. This is our territory, the territory of Ukraine,” he said.  Zelenskyy “can have peace, or he can fight for another three years before losing the whole country,” Trump said on social media Wednesday using what sounded an awful lot like the “false choice” or “false dilemma” logical fallacy. “We are very close to a Deal, but the man with ‘no cards to play’ should now, finally, GET IT DONE,” Trump wrote.  The European Union’s view: “Crimea is Ukraine,” foreign-policy chief Kaja Kallas told reporters Tuesday. “It means a lot for the ones who are occupied that others dont recognise this as Russian,” she warned as talks with Trump’s aides appeared to be faltering.  For some recent history, the New York Times pointed out Wednesday, “Just three years ago, Marco Rubio, then a senator and now Mr. Trump’s secretary of state, cosponsored an amendment to prohibit the United States from ever recognizing any Russian claim of sovereignty over parts of Ukraine that it has seized.” And in 2018, the Trump administration issued a formal statement rejecting recognition of Crimea as Russian territory. You can still find it on the State Department’s website. Zelenskyy also shared an image of the declaration on social media Wednesday as a reminder.  Meanwhile, Russian air attacks on Ukraine continue, including a barrage that killed nine people in Kyiv after Russia launched 70 missiles and nearly 150 attack drones, Zelenskyy said on social media. “I am grateful to everyone around the world who stands with Ukraine and supports our people,” he said.  Hours later, Trump wrote on social media, “I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Lets get the Peace Deal DONE!” Also: Today and tomorrow, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte is visiting the U.S. for meetings with  Secretary of State Marco Rubio, SecDef Pete Hegseth, and White House National Security Advisor Mike Waltz. “Thanks for the warm welcome and the good discussion on how to ensure a stronger, fairer, more lethal NATO,” Rutte said on social media after arriving at the Pentagon. “Europe and Canada are ramping up defence spending and we’re all working to increase production capacity,” he added.  Welcome to this Thursday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 1898, Spain declared war on the United States. SecDef latest Hegseth had the Signal messaging app installed on an office computer, the latest drip-drip of detail about the defense secretary’s flouting of information-security rules that would get any U.S. servicemember censured or prosecuted. “The move was intended to circumvent a lack of cellphone service in much of the Pentagon and enable easier communication with other Trump officials, said people familiar with the matter,” the Washington Post reports. Latest: “Trump unlikely to dismiss Hegseth, but officials are troubled by disarray in Pentagon chief’s inner circle,” is CNN’s headline of the day. New: Hegseth ordered a makeup studio installed near the Pentagon briefing room, CBS News reported Wednesday. “The renovation that was initially planned was estimated to cost more than $40,000, but the ideas were scaled back, sources said.” A DOD spokesperson denied that the plans were ever that costly, and said, "Changes and upgrades to the Pentagon Briefing Room are nothing new and routinely happen during changes in an administration.” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell responded to the report on social media Wednesday evening, writing, “This story is 100% Fake News.” CBS has more, here. “How a Lloyd Austin aide became Pete Hegseth’s “only guy standing’” is the headline on a revealing story about one of the SecDef’s few senior advisors to survive the wave of recent firings. Read that, from Defense News’ Noah Robertson, here. Additional reading:  “A Beleaguered Hegseth Wanders Into His Forever War,” Bill Hennigan argues in the op-ed section of the New York Times;  “Pentagon’s innovation arm looks beyond acquisition reform to speed commercial tech buying,” Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams reported Wednesday from the the Apex Defense forum;  And “DOD kicks off review of major defense acquisition programs as Hegseth touts reforms,” Defense Scoop reported Wednesday after Hegseth spoke at the U.S. Army War College in Pennsylvania.  Trump 2.0 China’s rare-earth mineral squeeze will hit the Pentagon hard. From tungsten in armor-piercing rounds to gallium in radars, the U.S. Defense Department has built a warfighting enterprise with a supply chain that runs straight through China. But recent developments threaten the Pentagon’s ability to maintain that enterprise,” Defense One’s Patrick Tucker reported Wednesday.  China has long dominated rare-earth mining and processing. But this latest decision tightens the faucet on materials needed for technologies ranging from hypersonic-missile guidance systems to cancer treatments. The measures follow similar export bans issued in December 2024 on gallium, germanium, and antimony—metals used in semiconductors, infrared optics, and armor-piercing munitions. But the chokepoint isn’t mining; it’s refinement, Tucker writes. The U.S. often ships raw mineral precursors to China for processing and re-imports them as components. With Beijings 2024 export bans now expanded to include tungsten and tellurium, that loop is closing. Even antimony mined in Australia becomes unusable for U.S. systems if refined in China. The result: 88% of DoD’s critical mineral supply chains are exposed to Chinese influence​. Read more, here.  And lastly: Boeing’s defense unit reported no losses last quarter, returning to profitability after nearly a year, Defense One’s Audrey Decker reported Wednesday. Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg credited progress on several of its thorny programs, but cautioned that the Defense, Space & Security unit still has some ground to make up. “Im not claiming victory here yet,” Ortberg said during the company’s first-quarter earnings call on Wednesday. “But I do think our discipline, cost risk management and active management with our customers to get to a win-win on these programs is helping. Obviously, our goal here is to get our defense business back up to a high-single-digit [margins] kind of performing business. And theres no reason, I see, we cant do that,” he said.   Notable: Boeing is still working through problems with its troubled KC-46 tankers, deliveries of which have been halted since February after cracks were found in the “outboard fixed-trailing-edge support structure.” The Air Force and Boeing have not said when they expect deliveries to resume. Despite ongoing challenges, Boeing executives highlighted their win of the Next Generation Air Dominance sixth-gen fighter jet as a “transformational accomplishment” for the company, one that will ensure the company’s fighter franchise for decades. Continue reading, here.  Related reading:  “China sends Boeing planes back to US over tariffs,” the BBC reported Wednesday;  ‘“Boeing ready to resell jets as tariffs hit China trade,” Reuters reported Thursday; “WA can now restrict outside National Guard from entering state,” the Seattle Times reported Tuesday; read over Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson’s message shortly after signing the new law, here;  “Trump’s Approval Rating Has Been Falling Steadily, Polling Average Shows,” the New York Times reported Wednesday;  And “Majorities disapprove of some key Trump administration actions,” including reducing federal agencies, raising tariffs, and eliminating diversity programs across government, the Pew Research Center reported Tuesday.  ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Indonesia needs a two-track approach to its foreign-fighter problem

 

at 4/24/25 7:00am

This commentary is published in coordination with the 2025 Global Security Forum, of which Defense One is a media partner. The leaders of Jemaah Islamiyah disbanded their al-Qaeda-affiliated jihadist group last June—but the schools that serve as the group’s ideological factories remain active. The Indonesian government must take action to prevent JI members who traveled to fight in Syria from using the schools to galvanize the group’s resurgence. JI had long relied on Islamic boarding schools, or pesantren, operating under the radar as part of the Indonesian educational system. These radicalized schools steeped young minds in radical beliefs and produced a steady supply of supporters. At least 16 former JI fighters are now in Syria, where they fought alongside the Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham rebels who overthrew the Assad regime. If they return to Indonesia, they could use the schools to galvanize the group’s return—threatening Indonesia and beyond. The Indonesian government must take a two-pronged approach: reform the pesantren network and implement a controlled-repatriation program for such men. First, the government must establish a dedicated regulatory body to monitor and audit pesantren. This body would ensure that extremist teachings are eliminated, replacing them with civic education and democratic values. The teachers themselves must also be vetted to ensure that they hold only moderate Islamic views, and some may need retraining. The government must also work to involve community leaders, including religious scholars and civil society organizations, in countering extremist narratives and providing alternative educational opportunities. By building strong relationships within local communities, Indonesia can create an environment that discourages extremism and encourages moderation, helping to deradicalize those within pesantren and prevent future generations from falling prey to extremist ideologies. At the same time, the government must also forge a controlled legal process to repatriate members of terrorist groups who went abroad to fight in conflict zones like Syria. These individuals bring battlefield experience, hardened ideologies, and critical connections to global jihadist networks. If allowed to return unchecked, they could re-join radical elements in Indonesia, revitalizing the JI movement. These returnees may serve as bridges between local militants and international jihadist networks, further complicating counterterrorism efforts. So these fighters must be held accountable for any crimes they may have committed, but must also be given the tools to reintegrate into society in a positive way. That includes participation in rehabilitation and de-radicalization programs designed to address the causes of their extremism. Fortunately, Indonesia can draw on other countries’ experience, adapting approaches as necessary. Saudi Arabia’s reforms in religious education and Malaysia’s initiatives for rehabilitation offer valuable lessons that Indonesia can adapt to its unique context. Egypt and Kazakhstan also have valuable experience. International cooperation and the exchange of best practices are essential. Reforming pesantren and implementing a controlled repatriation process for foreign fighters are critical steps to secure Indonesia’s future against radicalization and violent extremism. A comprehensive approach that combines regulatory oversight, educational reform, community engagement, and law enforcement will help eliminate JI’s ideological influence and prevent returning fighters from reigniting extremist networks that could threaten Indonesia, the region, and the world. Dr. Noor Huda Ismail is a Visiting Fellow at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore and an adjunct professor at International Relations Department at Diponegoro University in Central Java, Indonesia ]]

[Category: Ideas]

— Trump pressures Zelenskyy to accept pro-Russian deal

 

at 4/24/25 2:35am

In the clearest sign yet that the White House could soon abandon support for Ukraine, President Donald Trump on Wednesday renewed pressure on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to accept a U.S.-brokered peace proposal that includes recognition of Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea, among other sacrifices—but little to no concessions for Russian President Vladimir Putin. In a post on Truth Social, Trump reiterated his claim that Ukrainian soldiers are "dying for no reason whatsoever,” and said that if Zelenskyy "wants Crimea, why didn’t they fight for it eleven years ago when it was handed over to Russia without a shot being fired?" Trump’s framing puts him in direct opposition not just to the current Ukrainian government, but to over a decade of international law, diplomatic precedent, and bipartisan U.S. policy. But a former diplomat and leading Ukraine analyst said it’s not too late for Trump to pursue a different approach, salvage negotiations, and set up the conditions for a more lasting ceasefire by offering more support for Ukraine and maintaining pressure on Russia. Trump’s post Wednesday followed similar statements earlier in the day by Vice President JD Vance, who is traveling in India.  “Weve issued a very explicit proposal to both the Russians and the Ukrainians, and its time for them to either say yes, or for the United States to walk away from this process,” Vance told reporters.  [[Related Posts]] The deal greatly favors Russia and puts Ukraine in a vulnerable position. It would “freeze” the current front lines of the conflict, leaving Russian forces deep inside of Ukraine’s territory, prohibit Ukraine from ever joining NATO, and essentially demand Ukraine cease any military efforts to regain control of Crimea. Trump, in his post, said, “Nobody is asking Zelensky to recognize Crimea as Russian territory.” But the implication is that Ukraine would be alone in pursuing some sort legal remedy. Ukrainian leaders responded with swift and unequivocal rejection of the proposal.  “There is nothing to talk about—it is our land, the land of the Ukrainian people,” Zelenskyy said in a nationally broadcast interview April 22, as reported by AP.  High-level peace talks scheduled in London were downgraded after U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio canceled his participation. Still, Ukrainian officials engaged in discussions with U.S. envoy Keith Kellogg, and Zelenskyys chief of staff reiterated Ukraines unwavering position on sovereignty and territorial integrity during these talks. Zelenskyy described those discussions as promising. But Kellogg, long known as a staunch defender of Ukraine’s sovereignty and a resolute Russia hawk, is less influential in the administration than Trump’s Russia envoy, former real-estate developer Steven Witkoff, who has embraced Russia’s demands, repeated false Russian talking points, and may have other conflicts of interest, reportedly .  “Witkoff continues to be so visibly outplayed by the Russians,” Daniel Fried of the Atlantic Council, who served as assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, told Defense One on Wednesday. “Witkoff clearly does not understand the detail, the substance of the issue. Hes made that clear by accepting the Russian arguments at face value, which you should never do,” he said.  Trump still has an opportunity to make a ceasefire work, Fried said, “if it consists of a ceasefire in place and security for Ukraine.” He said a U.S. recognition of Crimea as Russian would be “a terrible idea…utterly unnecessary, damages almost a century of US foreign policy,” and noted the White House has shown its willingness to reverse course on other policy matters.  Zelenskyy and other Ukrainian officials have pointed out repeatedly that Ukraine’s constitution, let alone Ukraine’s parliament, would never allow for a surrender of Ukraine’s territory, nor could the country hold elections while citizens are living under Russian occupation.  Said Fried, “If [the final negotiated outcome] appears to be a surrender of Ukraine that is consigning them to a gray zone of insecurity, then the message is: Putin can have the rest of it at a time of his own choosing.” What’s at stake, he says, is a heightened risk of a replay of 1938, wherein Germany signed an agreement with Czechoslovakia, the Munich agreement, effectively allowing German leader Adolf Hitler to annex a portion of Germany’s neighbor. Six months later, Hitler broke the agreement and attacked the rest of Czechoslovakia.  “Munich analogies have been overused and overused for 90 years. Now it actually applies,” Fried said. George Barros, who leads the Russia and geopolitical intelligence teams at the Institute for the Study of War, told Defense One: “The U.S. position is puzzling, as it doesnt advance President Trumps stated objectives of achieving an end to war in Europe and a robust peace. The United States rewarding Putins annexation of Crimea and removing the brakes from Russias defense industrial base through sanctions relief, while not also increasing deterrence in Europe, is not a path to peace through strength. It will embolden Putin and Putin’s way of war.” Fried and Barros agreed that continued pressure on Putin—something that’s largely missing from the current White House approach—could make a big difference, because Putin is not in as strong a position as some believe.  “Russia at its current rate of advance is not capable of seizing Donetsk or Zaporizhia regions anytime in the next two years. We have reason to believe that the Russian position will only continue to weaken as Russia impales itself on a well-armed Ukraine,” Barros said. “Putin has vulnerabilities we are either overlooking or choosing to not leverage. Protracted war has greatly degraded the health of the Russian economy and destroyed much of Russias conventional military. Now is the time to compel Russia to make concessions so Russia can evade difficult decisions Putin would rather not have to face. Putin is betting on the U.S. letting Russia off the hook despite Russias own precarious position.” Also on Wednesday, Putin gave the world a glimpse of his long-term plan during a meeting with Russia’s military commission, where he called for accelerated expansion of drone manufacturing and the formalization of drone warfare in the Russian military, as well as the development of new capabilities. He gave no indication of easing military spending, even though they are harming Russia’s economy.   That indicates Russia will continue aggressive military modernization and advanced capability development at current government funding levels, regardless of any breakthrough diplomatic outcome related to Ukraine, Sam Bendett, advisor in Russian studies at CNA, told Defense One. That sets him up for a renewed military assault in a few years time.  “None of what he said is particularly new, regarding adapting military education and military regulations. Russian military bloggers and commentators were screaming about this on their Telegram channels for two years now.” Correction: An earlier version of this report misquoted a Truth Social post. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Pentagon’s innovation arm looks beyond acquisition reform to speed commercial tech buying

 

at 4/23/25 9:28pm

NATIONAL HARBOR, Md.—The White House has made it clear that it wants to uncomplicate the Pentagon’s labyrinthian acquisition system. But the antiquated process that treats buying quadcopter drones the same as fighter jets is not the only thing that keeps commercial companies from national security work. While the Defense Department must ensure the software it puts on “government systems is secure in the event of various and even more sophisticated attacks,” the potentially yearslong process of getting an authority to operate is “a tremendous barrier in terms of the amount of time and cost it takes,” Liz Young McNally, the Defense Innovation Unit’s deputy director for commercial operations, said Wednesday at the Apex Defense forum.  The authority-to-operate, or ATO, process is required to verify that software is safe to use.  “Its one of those areas like, the intent behind it is good…weve made some progress, but there is a lot more that really needs to happen,” she said. The Trump administration has been very focused on acquisition reform to make it easier for companies to do business with the Pentagon. The efforts, including a software memo from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directing contracting officers to use rapid buying tools, have been well received, while also zooming in on how larger cultural issues can slow down tech adoption.  “Most people choose not to tailor,” said Melissa Johnson, who leads acquisition executive for U.S. Special Operations Command, during a keynote conversation at the forum. And that’s a training issue.  [[Related Posts]] “Everybody needs to understand, in the acquisition community, all the tools that are available to them,” she said. “Because if youre only using one tool that you learned 20 years ago, and you think thats the only thing youre missing out on an opportunity to…be more flexible, go faster, and maybe solve problems that you couldnt solve before.”  Young McNally said she’s “hopeful” that defense acquisition reform is on a glide path, but the ATO and other issues persist. The upside is that once a company lands an ATO  within the Defense Department, there’s reciprocity with other defense organizations. The downside is system owners might not trust an ATO they didn’t have a hand in “to ensure the reciprocity actually happens and people trust each other on that,” Young McNally said.  And that’s ultimately a culture concern around risk. “I know that you gave the ATO to them, but I dont fully trust, trust your ATO, because if something happens, Im the one whos ultimately going to be blamed for it,” she said of the mentality that leads to systems owners pushing for companies to go through the ATO process even if they’ve already gotten one somewhere else.  “The concern and fear of that happening and what that would do is bigger…than having that company hang out for another year, waiting to get the ATO. And thats a risk-based decision that we have, more collectively, gotten comfortable with.” The Defense Innovation Unit has been testing out rapid ATOs with some of its portfolio companies and is looking to see how that process can be scaled elsewhere. Budgets are another issue, including “how flexible the budget is and how much money were going to be able to devote to commercial technology,” she said.  “Were working on those in collaboration with other innovation organizations, the [Defense Department], Congress, etc. So there is work being done on each of those, but I think thats the next wave of barriers that were going to have to solve in order to really ensure that technology gets in the hands of the warfighter at the speed we need.” ]]

[Category: Business]

— Boeing’s defense arm is back in the black, but ‘not claiming victory’ yet

 

at 4/23/25 2:25pm

Boeing’s defense unit reported no losses last quarter, returning to profitability after nearly a year. Boeing CEO Kelly Ortberg credited progress on several of its thorny programs, but cautioned that the Defense, Space & Security unit is not in the clear yet.  BDS, which reported a record $4.9 billion in losses last year, reported no losses in the first quarter of 2025. The company is making progress on the Air Force’s T-7 trainer and VC-25B presidential jets, with Ortberg saying that cost and schedule estimates are “well-contained.”  “Im not claiming victory here yet. Weve got a lot of work to do on the [estimates to complete] on a lot of these programs, but I do think our discipline, cost risk management and active management with our customers to get to a win-win on these programs is helping. Obviously, our goal here is to get our defense business back up to a high-single-digit [margins] kind of performing business. And theres no reason, I see, we cant do that,” Ortberg said during the company’s first-quarter earnings call on Wednesday.  On the T-7 program, Ortberg said the company has completed two “incentive milestones” as part of a revised agreement with the Air Force. The agreement, which was reached earlier this year, will give Boeing money to accelerate parts of the program and address other issues that weren’t part of the initial contract. Boeing has absorbed over $1 billion in losses on the T-7 program since it underbid to win the fixed-price contract and delays have put the program years behind schedule.  The company is also working with the government to accelerate the VC-25B program and deliver new Air Force One jets earlier than the current timeline after delays have pushed delivery to the end of President Trump’s term, possibly 2028 or 2029. Trump has publicly criticized the program’s delays and has even considered looking at other options, including buying a used Boeing aircraft that could be retrofitted in the meantime. “On VC-25B, we continue to work with the customer to revise the program plan to allow for an earlier first delivery, while maintaining our focus on safety and quality,” Ortberg said.  [[Related Posts]] While Boeing claims progress, the company is still working through problems with its troubled KC-46 tankers—deliveries of which have been halted since February after cracks were found in the “outboard fixed-trailing-edge support structure.” The Air Force and Boeing have not said when they expect deliveries to resume.  The cracks don’t pose a safety risk and the rework is minor so “it really wasnt a big deal. It didnt disrupt the quarter at all,” said Brian West, Boeing’s chief financial officer. Despite ongoing challenges, Boeing executives highlighted their win of the Next Generation Air Dominance sixth-gen fighter jet as a “transformational accomplishment” for the company, one that will ensure the company’s fighter franchise for decades.  Boeing won the NGAD engineering and manufacturing development contract in March as a cost-plus incentive fee deal, meaning the government fits the development expenses and the company gets a fee depending on how it performs. Investors pressed for details on future NGAD contracts and how much risk the company would be assuming. Ortberg said he couldn’t disclose anything related to the contract structure, but said they haven’t committed to “undo risk.” “Clearly, we havent come off our strategy of ensuring were entering into the appropriate contract type for the appropriate type of work. So I wouldnt worry that weve signed up to undo risk like weve done in some of our past fixed price programs, but thats about all I can say on that right now,” the CEO said.   As Ortberg implements his turnaround plan, he’s selling off non-core parts of the company. Boeing announced this week that it would sell parts of its Jeppesen digital aviation solutions business to Thoma Bravo for $10.55 billion, and the CEO hinted that more sales would be coming.  “We do have a couple more…that were looking at. I would say that theyre probably not going to be as big as Jeppesen, but weve got a couple more things that Id like to action in the portfolio. I am done with the review, so I kind of have our mind on what we need to do here. I think a couple more smaller activities are probably in the cards, and well just have to see,” Ortberg said.  The road to recovery for Boeing will be far from smooth, however, as Trump’s global trade war has already hurt the companys commercial deliveries. In response to tariffs, China has halted acceptance of new Boeing planes. Still, Ortberg remained confident that the company’s financial outlook remains intact, and he said contingency plans are in place. ]]

[Category: Business]

— China’s rare-earth mineral squeeze will hit the Pentagon hard

 

at 4/23/25 1:23pm

China is beginning to restrict exports of rare-earth minerals crucial to U.S. military might—a long-warned-of vulnerability that is becoming an urgent reality. From tungsten in armor-piercing rounds to gallium in radars, the U.S. Defense Department has built a warfighting enterprise with a supply chain that runs straight through China. But recent developments threaten the Pentagon’s ability to maintain that enterprise. In early April, Beijing imposed sweeping export controls on seven rare earth elements used in everything from laser-guided weapons to MRI machines. The newly restricted elements—samarium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, lutetium, scandium, and yttrium—require a government-issued license for export, with Chinese officials citing “national security” justifications for the change.  Dan Darling of Forecast International observed earlier this month that “while the latest step taken by China is not an outright ban, this licensing requirement will undoubtedly introduce uncertainty and limit the consistent flow of critical components to manufacturers. This action in an already volatile global marketplace echoes Beijing’s 2010 retaliation against Japan, highlighting the potential for the weaponization of crucial supply chain resources.” China has long dominated rare-earth mining and processing. But this latest decision tightens the faucet on materials needed for technologies ranging from hypersonic-missile guidance systems to cancer treatments. The measures follow similar export bans issued in December 2024 on gallium, germanium, and antimony—metals used in semiconductors, infrared optics, and armor-piercing munitions. [[Related Posts]] Since 2010, the Pentagon’s demand for components containing five critical minerals—antimony, gallium, germanium, tungsten, and tellurium—has surged, with contracts growing by 23.2% annually and gallium-related contracts alone increasing 41.8% per year​. More than 80,000 distinct parts across 1,900 weapons now depend on these materials, or about 78% of all DoD weapons may be affected, according to a new report by the Govini data analytics firm. The Navy leads in dependency, with over 91% of its systems containing at least one of the minerals. Consider one example, gallium, a mineral that plays a big role in GPS systems as well as radars. “China’s export ban on antimony, gallium, and germanium, parts containing these critical minerals saw prices increase by an average of 5.2% after the ban, compared to procurements of those same parts the few months prior. More specifically, the price for components containing gallium increased by 6.0%, those with antimony by 4.5%, and germanium by 1.6%. All other parts increased by an average of only 1.4%.” But the chokepoint isn’t mining; it’s refinement. The U.S. often ships raw mineral precursors to China for processing and re-imports them as components. With Beijings 2024 export bans now expanded to include tungsten and tellurium, that loop is closing. Even antimony mined in Australia becomes unusable for U.S. systems if refined in China. The result: 88% of DoD’s critical mineral supply chains are exposed to Chinese influence​. Consider this: nearly all antimony used in key platforms such as the F-16, Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, and Minuteman III missile passes through China at some stage of processing. Only 19% is accessible without Chinese intermediaries. The strategic cost is already measurable—prices for gallium-containing parts jumped 6% within three months of the bans; antimony parts rose 4.5%, while all other DoD parts rose just 1.4%. Even if the U.S. escapes dependency on these five minerals, more vulnerabilities await. Magnesium—essential for airframes and missiles—is dominated by China and lacks a U.S. stockpile. The same goes for graphite and fluorspar, which are critical to rocket propulsion, lasers, and nuclear fuel processing​. The report suggests a multi-front response. First, revive domestic processing capacity. The U.S. still has zero domestic sources for gallium, germanium, and tungsten, but recent federal investment has begun to yield results. For example, the Kennecott mine in Utah has helped cut tellurium import reliance from 95% in 2019 to just 25% in 2023​ Second, the government must exploit mineral companionality—the fact that critical minerals often occur alongside others. A zinc mine in Tennessee could soon yield 30 tons of germanium and 40 tons of gallium annually, nearly matching China’s 2022 global exports of the same materials​. But tapping these sources requires regulatory reform: most mining permits ignore companion minerals, delaying extraction by years. Third, use artificial intelligence and software to discover untapped byproducts across the U.S. industrial base—bringing overlooked commercial suppliers into the defense ecosystem. Finally, strategic stockpiles must grow—and in some cases, be established for the first time. Gallium and tellurium, for instance, still have no government reserves despite their critical status. DARPA has hired AI company HyperSpectral to do just that. As the report concludes, “America’s dependence on China for critical minerals represents a glaring and growing strategic vulnerability.” Unless addressed, that vulnerability may soon define the limits of U.S. deterrence—not in dollars or troop strength, but in elemental scarcity. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The D Brief: More loose lips; Troops get detention powers; State’s coming cuts; Primes’ aircraft plans; And a bit more.

 

at 4/23/25 9:21am

Forensics of a scandal: Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth reportedly moved information from a general shared on a classified channel and to at least two separate, unsecured chat threads on the messaging app Signal, Courtney Kube and Gordon Lubold of NBC News reported Tuesday, citing three U.S. officials “with direct knowledge of the exchanges.” The information Hegseth shared on Signal originated from Central Command’s Army Gen. Michael Erik Kurilla, who “was doing exactly what he was supposed to: providing Hegseth, his superior, with information he needed to know and using a system specifically designed to safely transmit sensitive and classified information,” Kube and Lubold write. “Less than 10 minutes elapsed between Kurilla’s giving Hegseth the information and Hegseth’s sending it to the two group chats.” Why it matters: “The sequence of events…could raise new questions about Hegseth’s handling of the information, which he and the government have denied was classified,” according to NBC.  Said Hegseth Tuesday on Fox: “What was shared over Signal, then and now, however you characterize it, was informal, unclassified coordinations for media coordination, other things.”  As for the president, “Pete’s doing a great job; everybody’s happy with him,” Trump told reporters Monday. Continue reading at NBC, here.  Behind the scenes at the Pentagon, “Hegseth surrounded himself with advisers who quickly turned into vicious rivals for power—whose bitter brawl has now unraveled into revenge power plays, surprise firings, accusations of leaking and embarrassing headlines that are blowing up the Pentagon, distracting from Trump’s agenda and possibly jeopardizing Hegseth’s job,” four reporters from Politico reported Tuesday.   And Hegseth’s soon-to-be-departing chief of staff Joe Kasper “ran into trouble at DOD by berating officials in meetings, calling military officials by a lower rank on purpose, and even graphically describing his bowel movements in high-level meetings,” Jack Detsch of Politico writes. Read more, here.  Update: The U.S. military can now search and detain anyone in a “60-foot-wide zone of New Mexico land that runs along the U.S. border with Mexico [that] has been deemed part of Fort Huachuca, Ariz.,” Stars and Stripes reported Monday.  It’s being called “the New Mexico National Defense Area,” previously known as the Roosevelt Reservation, and about 170 square miles of it was transferred to the U.S. military last week by the Interior Department. “Through these enhanced authorities, U.S. Northern Command will ensure those who illegally trespass in the New Mexico National Defense Area are handed over to Customs and Border Protection or our other law enforcement partners,” said Air Force Gen. Gregory Guillot, NORTHCOM commander. More, here.  FWIW: Trump is losing support from voters on his strongest issue, immigration, according to new polling from Reuters published Tuesday. “On a range of issues, from inflation and immigration to taxation and rule of law, the Reuters/Ipsos poll showed that Americans who disapproved of Trumps performance outnumbered those who approved on every issue in the poll. On immigration, his strongest area of support, 45% of respondents approved of Trumps performance but 46% disapproved.” More, here.  New: Trump’s new Navy secretary said he’s “rescind[ed] the Biden Administration’s Navy Climate Action 2030 program,” which was released (PDF) three years ago. “Our focus needs to be on lethality and our warfighters,” SecNav John Phelan announced in a video posted to social media.  Phelan also just appointed former reporter Kristina Wong as the Navy’s chief spokeswoman. Like Phelan, Wong has no military experience. But she worked at Washington media outlet The Hill before moving to Breitbart and curating a reliably pro-Trump social media feed that includes an image of rioters “peeking into the Capitol building” during the violent January 6 effort to overturn the 2020 U.S. election. Welcome to this Wednesday edition of The D Brief, a newsletter dedicated to developments affecting the future of U.S. national security, brought to you by Ben Watson and Bradley Peniston. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 1941, the Greeks evacuated Athens in the face of an invading Nazi military. King George II along with more than 50,000 allied British, Australian, New Zealand and Polish troops fled to Crete while an estimated 15,000 Greek soldiers and 3,700 Allied troops perished in the battle for Greece. Industry After NGAD loss, Lockheed says it will ‘supercharge’ F-35. After losing out on the Air Force’s Next Generation Air Dominance contract, Lockheed Martin plans to funnel the technology into its F-35 program, CEO Jim Taiclet said on Tuesday’s earning call. “I challenged the team to deliver 80% of sixth-gen capability at 50% of the cost,” Taiclet said. Audrey Decker has a bit more, here.  Northrop takes $477M loss on B-21 to speed up production, cover materials costs. At the company’s Tuesday earnings call, CEO Kathy Warden said Northrop Grumman and the Air Force “jointly” made the decision to invest in ways to make the stealth bomber more quickly than the Pentagon has so far required. She also said that materials costs had risen more than anticipated. The new loss brings projected losses on the first five production lots past $2 billion. Decker reports, here. Trump 2.0 Staff cuts coming to Foggy Bottom: The State Department will eliminate 15 percent of its domestic staff as part of a reorganization that will close one-sixth of its 734 offices and bureaus, officials said Tuesday. Of the remaining 602 offices and bureaus, 137 are expected to be moved around within the department, Government Executive’s Eric Katz reports.  For now, the changes will only affect domestic offices. Department officials told employees they had made no decisions on embassy, consulate, or overseas post closures.  Update: Amid reports of his departure from Trump’s White House, Elon Musk said he wants to keep the job even if it’s just one or two days per week, he told investors on a conference call Tuesday. Reuters has more. Additional reading: “Veterans affairs agency orders staff to report each other for ‘anti-Christian bias’,” the Guardian reported Tuesday.  Ukraine Trump Tower Moscow? Russian negotiators are reportedly trying to “bait” Trump into a “grand bargain” over the future of Vladimir Putin’s Ukraine invasion. That alleged effort includes extending the U.S. president an offer of “rare earths deals and geopolitical leverage in Iran and North Korea [as well as] a long-dreamed-of Trump Tower in Moscow,” the Moscow Times reported Monday, citing “Five current Russian government officials, including two diplomats, three sources close to the Kremlin and employees of three major state-owned companies.” Occupation watch: “The scale on which Russian authorities are seizing Ukrainian property is staggering,” writes Karolina Hird at the Institute for the Study of War, citing, among other things, a BBC investigation into Russian appropriations in the occupied city of Mariupol. More, here. Related reading: “Russia Welcomes U.S. Proposal to Deny NATO Membership to Ukraine,” the Wall Street Journal reports, noting that Moscow continues to slow-walk actual progress toward the ceasefire the White House says it wants; And the “Trump administration unwinds efforts to investigate Russian war crimes.” The Washington Post reports that the U.S. has “moved to withdraw from an international group led by the European Union that was created to punish Moscow for violating international law in its invasion of Ukraine” and “reduced the work of the Justice Department’s War Crimes Accountability Team and dismantled a program to seize assets of sanctioned Russian oligarchs.” Etc. And lastly: Europe is realigning—but can leaders keep citizens on board? In a Defense One commentary, Michaela Millender and Clara Broekaert of The Soufan Center applaud European leaders’ galvanized efforts to build up the continent’s defenses, but warn about the difficulties of persuading their populaces to stay the expensive course. Read that, here. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Nano-material breakthrough could revolutionize night vision

 

at 4/23/25 9:00am

A new way to make large ultrathin infrared sensors that don’t need cryogenic cooling could radically change night vision for the military or even autonomous vehicles.  Night vision (thermal) is clunky, power-intensive, and requires cooling components that could be hard to get, especially in the event of a conflict with China. But the U.S. Air Force, Army, and special operations forces have growing needs for night-vision, as do next-generation autonomous vehicle makers.  In a study published today in Nature, researcher Jeehwan Kim of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, along with collaborators from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, and Seoul National University, unveiled a process called “atomic lift-off,” or ALO, which creates extremely thin layers of special crystal material that can stand on their own without being stuck to, say, a graphene lattice. The resulting skin is thinner than 10 nanometers​. Most infrared sensors today, like the widely used mercury cadmium telluride detectors, have a big drawback: they need to be kept extremely cold—about -321°F—which means heavy, power-hungry cooling systems. That makes them hard to use in compact military gear, drones, or satellites, where space and power are limited. The researchers found a way around that problem. They created an ultra-thin film, less than a hundredth the width of a human hair, made from a special material called PMN-PT. This material can sense tiny changes in heat with record-breaking sensitivity—about 100 times better than many older materials such as lithium tantalate. [[Related Posts]] Most importantly, PMN-PT sensors work at room temperature. That means they can detect a wide range of heat signatures in the far-infrared spectrum without needing to be chilled—potentially transforming how we build night vision and heat-sensing devices. The researchers proved that their new technique could be used to make larger and thinner infrared sensor films without losing quality. They created membranes just 10 nanometers thick and 10 millimeters wide—about the size of a fingernail—while keeping the crystal structure smooth and consistent. They also built working infrared sensor arrays from slightly thicker membranes (80 nanometers) and found that every single device in the batch of 108 worked perfectly. The thinner 10nm versions were harder to handle during manufacturing, so fewer of those survived the process, but the ones that did still worked well. The material can respond to wavelengths across the entire infrared spectrum, allowing the wearer to see more clearly than current night-vision would allow, or potentially to enable autonomous vehicles to better detect obstacles, threats, or pedestrians, even in foggy or difficult conditions that might inhibit cameras or other common sensors.  Even after being transferred to a new surface, the sensors kept their electrical performance. In tests, they stayed stable over time and detected heat as effectively as today’s best cooled infrared detectors—without needing heavy cooling equipment. The project was supported by grants from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the U.S. Department of Energy​. The U.S. military isn’t just looking for smaller, more effective night vision, but also for new solutions that don’t rely on minerals, materials, or components from China. China is a major global supplier of thermal imaging equipment as well as germanium and chalcogenide, two key minerals in lenses required for thermal imaging.  This research points to a new kind of vision: not just night vision without cooling, but a production method for faster and cheaper development of night vision equipment with more U.S. components. ]]

[Category: Science & Tech]

As of 4/30/25 12:56am. Last new 4/29/25 6:44pm.