Crooked Bough News Round-up

— As CCAs make international debut, companies pitch European co-production

 

at 6/20/25 3:40pm

PARIS—Anduril and General Atomics unveiled full-scale mockups of their fighter drones to the international market this week, pitching customizable weapons and a chance for Europe to help build them.  U.S. Air Force officials helped both companies pitch the program to other countries, executives told Defense One at the Paris Air Show—even though the service has yet to field the drones itself.   “The U.S. Air Force has said: Lets move out. Lets make partners. Lets do co-production. Lets make it happen,” said Dave Alexander, president of General Atomics Aeronautical Systems. The U.S. government could approve export licenses very soon, the company added—in “weeks, not months.” The first increment of the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft program has been designed for air-to-air missions, but General Atomics and Anduril aim to take their platforms and customize them for European countries, saying the modularity of the drones makes it easy to swap out mission systems. European nations have expressed interest in air-to-ground missions, executives say, a “fairly straightforward” switch where the companies would take out the air-to-air systems and put in air-to-ground weapons and sensors, and possibly systems developed by the other nations.  “Are there indigenous capabilities that certain host nations want to bring? Maybe they have very good software autonomy or AI, maybe they have very good mission systems or weapons that they want to integrate. So thats [what] were kind of exploring with each one of the nations,” said Jason Levin, who runs Anduril’s air dominance and strike.  [[Related Posts]] Anduril announced Wednesday at the show that it will partner with German defense giant Rheinmetall to co-develop and produce Fury and Barracuda drones—tapping into the company’s European industrial base to develop different variants of the company’s products. The announcement comes as Europe is working to build out its own industrial base, and to rearm quickly to prepare from potential Russian aggression. “With the teaming arrangement with Rheinmetall, we can start exploring European variants, and so that might start from vehicles that are produced in the U.S. and exported to Germany, and then basically German-ize and missionize in Germany, all the way to working with Rheinmetall for rate production in Germany, and then for other host nations around Europe,” Levin said.  Anduril hasn’t decided whether it would build new production facilities in Europe or use existing Rheinmetall facilities. Rich Drake, general manager for Anduril UK, said it depends on how much demand there is and what level of in-country localization they want. The company is also still figuring out exactly what work Rheinmetall would do on Fury. But Levin said Rheinmetall does “excellent composites work” for the F-35, which could be used for Fury airframes, and highlightted to the company’s munitions as well.  General Atomics’ CCA offering is also up for co-production, though Alexander didn’t disclose which parts of the drone fighter could be manufactured abroad, saying it would vary by country.  With their international debut, the two firms are now competing stateside and abroad for CCA orders.  Asked how General Atomics’ offering differs from Anduril’s, Alexander pointed to its internal weapons bay, modular sensors, and “incredible range,” as well as the company’s long-standing experience building drones.  Anduril, meanwhile, is encouraging countries to look at the capabilities of both aircraft and “explore for themselves” what fits their needs, then work with Anduril to adapt Fury, rather than pitch a specific kind of vehicle and use case, Levin said.  Back home, the U.S. Air Force plans to decide whether to build one or both of the companies’ drones after their first flight this summer. The service developed the program to provide “affordable mass” for its fleet, and initial estimates put the cost of CCAs at about a third of an F-35, around $25 to $30 million each.  But General Atomics pushed back on that cost estimate, stating that their offering will be “far less than $20 million” per aircraft. Air Force officials have recently signaled that they want to go even cheaper and less exquisite on the program. Anduril declined to comment on the cost figure.  ]]

[Category: Business]

— Defense One Radio, Ep. 184: Former Ukrainian defense chief Oleksii Reznikov

 

at 6/20/25 12:48pm

Google Pla Apple Podcasts Guests: Former Ukrainian Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov in conversation with Defense One’s Patrick Tucker on the sidelines of the GLOBSEC 2025 conference in Prague. Defense One is media partner for this years 20th edition of the GLOBSEC Forum in Prague. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The D Brief: Israel, Iran trade strikes; Golden Dome, questioned; F-35 engine delay; Russian recession?; And a bit more.

 

at 6/20/25 9:27am

Neither Israel nor Iran are backing down after more than a week at war.  An Iranian missile attack wounded more than 20 Israelis in the north and south of the country on Friday, Haaretz reports. And for the Israeli side, “Fighter jets struck several Iranian missile systems and radar installations in the areas of Isfahan and Tehran, which were intended to target IDF aircraft and disrupt their operations,” the country’s military said on social media Friday, with an accompanying video of said strikes.  Iran’s top diplomat is visiting European officials in Switzerland. “Can they stop Trump joining Israel’s war?” Politico asked in its coverage of that meeting Friday.  Trump: “I will make my decision on whether or not to [join Israel’s war] within the next two weeks,” the president said in a statement Thursday, according to his press secretary. His statement cited “a chance for substantial negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.” Analysis: “That dashed Israeli hopes of a swift climax to the war,” the New York Times reports. “Israel seeks to destroy Iran’s nuclear enrichment program, and its leaders had hoped that Mr. Trump would soon send American bombers to destroy an underground enrichment site deemed largely impermeable to the kinds of munitions in Israel’s arsenal. Now, Israel must decide whether to wait for U.S. military support or use its own, less powerful missiles to attack the site.” About that special munition the U.S. is sitting on: It’s the GBU-57, or Massive Ordnance Penetrator, the subject of special features by the Times and the Wall Street Journal. “The U.S. military has concluded that one bomb would not destroy the Fordo facility on its own. To destroy the site, an attack [using B-2 Spirit stealth bombers] would have to come in waves, with bombers releasing one after another down the same hole,” the Times writes.  But U.S. defense officials are reportedly considering nuclear options as well, if it turns out Iran’s Fordo underground enrichment facility is beyond the reach of GBU-57s, the Guardian reports. Should the U.S. eventually elect to go the nuclear route, it would likely choose the B61-11 nuclear earth penetrator, arms control scholar Jeffrey Lewis writes. And that would have “a yield of 300 or 400 kilotons. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were 15 and 21 kt,” says Lewis.  “Nuclear earth penetrators dont dig all the way down to the bunker,” Lewis explained in a thread on social media Friday. “Instead, they burrow just deep enough to couple the energy from the explosion into the ground, sending a shockwave through the geology to crush the bunker. A few meters is enough,” he says. That’s because “A 300 kt weapon that burrows 3 m into the ground will impart the same energy as an 8 mt contact burst…Moreover, severely diminishing returns on ground shock occur ~10 m.” The big problem: Fallout. A panel of experts from the National Academy of Sciences “calculated that a 300 kt weapon would need to penetrate ~800 m to fully contain the explosion.” And that suggests, “Depending on which way the wind is blowing and the time of day, you might kill a lot of civilians,” he warns. Read the rest of his thread for details.   Related reading:  “Israel’s War on Iran Is Costing Hundreds of Millions of Dollars a Day,” the Wall Street Journal reported Thursday; “What Happens if Trump Decides to Strike Iran or Assassinate Its Leader?” the New York Times asked Friday; “The Supreme Court and the Long-Term Drift of the War Powers,” via national security law professor Steve Vladeck, writing Thursday;  See also, “The Three Dramatic Consequences of Israel’s Attack on Iran,” by former State Department counselor Eliot Cohen, writing at The Atlantic. 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 1963, the so-called “red telephone” was opened linking Washington, D.C., and Moscow. Around the Defense Department Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth has not yet completed this year’s defense budget, and he’s weeks behind deadline. But $25 billion Hegseth and Trump want to spend on their conceptual missile-defense system “Golden Dome” is in the reconciliation bill, which only needs Republican support to pass—and would raise the country’s debt ceiling by $5 trillion. But Golden Dome is a completely unproven system with incredibly ambitious goals, as former astronaut and Arizona Democratic Sen. Mark Kelly stressed in his exchange with Hegseth this week on Capitol Hill. “First of all, is this system designed to intercept a full salvo attack?” Kelly asked. Hegseth eventually replied, “Yeah, it’s not meant to be just one nation.” “So what kind of reliability are you aiming to build into this system? Are we looking for something like four-9s on intercept success?” Kelly asked. Hegseth seemed confused, so Kelly continued, “99.99% reliability.” Hegseth: “Obviously you seek the highest possible. You begin with what you have in integrating those C2 networks and sensors. Building up capabilities that are existing with an eye toward future capabilities that can come online as quickly as possible. Not just ground-based but space-based.” Kelly: “So against future capability too. So do you believe that we can build a system that can intercept all incoming threats? Do you think we could build that system? This is a very hard physics problem.” Hegseth: “You would know as well as anybody, sir, how difficult this problem is and that’s why we put our best people on it. We think the American people deserve it.” Kelly: “You’re talking about hundreds of ICBMs running simultaneously, varying trajectories, MIRVs, so multiple re-entry vehicles. Thousands of decoys. Hypersonic glide vehicles, all at once. And considering what the future threat might be, might even be more complicated than that. And you’re proposing spending not just $25 billion, but upwards of—I think [the Congressional Budget Office] estimated this at at least half a trillion; other estimates, a trillion dollars. I am all for having a system that would work. I am not sure that the physics can get there on this. It’s incredibly complicated.” Kelly also pointed out Hegseth and Trump cut 74% of the staff at the Pentagon’s weapons-testing office, the Office of the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation. And that’s the same office that would oversee testing of the Golden Dome.   Kelly’s advice to Hegseth: Finish your homework on Golden Dome. “You got to go back and take look at this but I also strongly encourage you to put together some—before we spend $25 billion or $175 billion or $563 billion or a trillion dollars—put together a group of people to figure out if the physics will work,” the senator said. “You could go down a road here and spend hundreds and hundreds of billions of dollars with the taxpayer money, get to the end and we have a system that is not functional. That very well could happen.”  Watch the full five-minute exchange (shared via veteran journalist Marcy Wheeler) on YouTube, here.  More reading: “F-35 engine upgrade hits delay, casting doubt on timeline,” reports Defenese One’s Audrey Decker from the Paris Air Show; “AUKUS review emerged after talks with counterparts, SecDef says,” Defense One’s Meghann Myers reports off Hegseth’s Senate testimony; “Johns Hopkins, University of Maryland sue defense department over funding,” the Baltimore Banner reports. And one more from the Old Line State: “‘Yesterday’s facilities,’ unstable workforce among base commanders’ worries,” by Route Fifty’s Chris Teale. Europe Russia is on “the brink of recession.” That’s what Economy Minister Maxim Reshetnikov told the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum on Thursday, according to Russian media reports. Indeed, the country may already be in one: “The numbers indicate cooling, but all our numbers are [like] a rearview mirror,” he said, some three years into a war that has drawn international sanctions and focused largely on military spending. AP reports, here. Meanwhile in Paris, U.S. defense companies—and their congressional backers—chased rising military spending. Trump-European “tension has been notably absent at this weeks Paris Airshow, where U.S. lawmakers and arms manufacturers pledged greater transatlantic partnership as Europe ramps up spending on everything from artillery shells and fighter jets to missile defence systems,” Reuters reports.  Runup to the June 24-25 NATO summit: “Spain says NATO’s anticipated 5% defense spending proposal as unreasonable” AP reports off a Thursday letter from Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte; “Sovereign citizens arrest linked to threat to NATO summit,” Netherlands Times writes in a followup to initial reporting; And stay tuned for coverage of the summit from The Hague by Defense One’s Audrey Decker. Troops in the homeland Update: An appeals court let Trump keep control of California’s National Guard for now. The latest decision (PDF) from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals keeps in place a hold on California’s request to return the troops back to the authority of Gov. Gavin Newsom, who did not ask for the National Guard’s assistance protecting immigration enforcement officials and federal property. A lower-court judge called Trump’s decision illegal, but the administration appealed the district judge’s ruling.  9th Circuit: “The undisputed facts demonstrate that before the deployment of the National Guard, protesters ‘pinned down’ several federal officers and threw ‘concrete chunks, bottles of liquid, and other objects’ at the officers. Protesters also damaged federal buildings and caused the closure of at least one federal building. And a federal van was attacked by protesters who smashed in the van’s windows,” the court’s three-judge panel wrote in its Thursday decision. Why it matters: “The court case could have wider implications on the president’s power to deploy soldiers within the United States after Trump directed immigration officials to prioritize deportations from other Democratic-run cities,” the Associated Press reports. “The ruling means control of the California National Guard will stay in federal hands as [California’s] lawsuit continues to unfold.” Notable: “Newsom could still challenge the use of the National Guard and U.S. Marines under other laws, including the bar on using troops in domestic law enforcement,” Reuters reports. On the horizon: Trump may try to send more National Guard troops to cities across the country, he said on social media just before midnight Thursday. “The Judges obviously realized that Gavin Newscum is incompetent and ill prepared, but this is much bigger than Gavin, because all over the United States, if our Cities, and our people, need protection, we are the ones to give it to them should State and Local Police be unable, for whatever reason, to get the job done. Thank you.” Second opinion: “That’s not exactly what the [9th Circuit Court’s] opinion said,” said former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance. “Although this is a win for Trump, the panel disagreed with him on a key issue,” she wrote Friday. “Instead, they noted that under the caselaw, ‘courts may at least review the President’s determination to ensure that it reflects a colorable assessment of the facts and law within a “range of honest judgment.”’ That language would seem to be a warning to the president not to overstep,” Vance said, and added, “But based on his social media post, it went unheard.” Next up: San Francisco District Judge Charles Breyer “has a hearing scheduled for later [Friday] on a preliminary injunction request that could reach additional issues like Trump’s use of the Marines and the Posse Comitatus Act, so expect more on this one in the coming days,” Vance said.  This week in masked men with guns: In Los Angeles, a group of men kitted out with body armor, weapons, and no identification tried unsuccessfully to gain entry into Dodgers Stadium parking lots Thursday ahead of an evening game with the Padres. The team believed they were Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, and turned them away. But who were they? USA Today reports ICE said the agency was “never there” and the Department of Homeland Security claimed the masked agents were with Customs and Border Patrol, though their presence was “unrelated to any operation or enforcement.” Drawing a crowd: “In recent immigration raids, ICE and other federal officials have sometimes operated in unmarked cars,” the New York Times reports. On Thursday, the cars and masked men eventually attracted protesters to the parking lot, so the LA police were dispatched to remove both the apparent agents and the protesters. When did masks become standard at ICE? “By law, federal agents are allowed to cover their faces, in order to protect themselves from retaliation by drug cartels and the like. But masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents seem to have become the rule rather than the exception,” writes Sam Adams at Slate. “It’s difficult to put a finger on exactly when the practice became widespread, especially since the volume of ICE raids has increased so dramatically so recently (and has received corresponding increased attention). But go back even a year, and it’s relatively easy to find coverage of ICE raids in which the agents’ faces are clearly visible.” Why it matters: “ICE says it wasn’t them. DHS says they were Border Patrol. But honestly who the hell knows? They’ve given permission for any psycho to put on a ski mask, point a gun, grab people & throw them into an unmarked vehicle,” California state Sen. Scott Wiener wrote on social media. Rewind: It was less than a week ago that a man dressed as a masked police officer went on a shooting spree in Minnesota this past weekend, killing former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark—shortly after non-fatally shooting Minn. State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette, at their home.  Additional reading:  “As ‘lone actor’ attacks rise, Trump cuts program aimed at spotting them,” USA Today reported Tuesday;  “LA Residents Foil ICE Raids Using Amazon Ring’s Neighborhood Watch App,” Forbes reported Wednesday;  “Trump administration puts new limits on Congress visits to immigration centers,” Reuters reported Thursday; Axios has similar reporting Friday, here;   “Trump Is Losing Political Ground on Immigration,” the Wall Street Journal reported Friday;  And a “French Lawmaker Says He Was Denied Entry Into the United States,” the New York Times reported Thursday from Paris; relatedly, “Do Americans Have a Right to Know About the World?” Sam Lebovic, historian at George Mason University, asked in February for the Knight First Amendment Institute.   ]]

[Category: Threats]

— AUKUS review emerged after talks with counterparts, SecDef says

 

at 6/18/25 2:34pm

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told lawmakers Wednesday that his decision to review the AUKUS security agreement came out of “long, personal conversations” with the U.K. and Australian defense ministers. He also suggested, without details, that the agreement might boost U.S. nuclear deterrence in the Indo-Pacific. News broke June 10 that the Pentagon would launch a 30-day review into the agreement, first reported by The Financial Times, and Hegseth confirmed his decision in testimony Friday. When asked about the decision again Wednesday, he told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he made the move after consulting his counterparts. “Reviews are always prudent, but those reviews actually come after conversations Ive had with the Minister of Defence [Secretary John] Healy in the U.K. and [Minister for Defence Richard] Marles in Australia – long, personal conversations about the status of this arrangement, both aspects of it.” The review will be led by the Pentagon’s policy chief, Elbridge Colby, who has been publicly wary of the agreement.  [[Related Posts]] In a series of tweets last summer, Colby expressed “skepticism” about the agreement, particularly whether it would result in more or fewer submarines deployed to the Indo-Pacific.  “Usual caveat here that I make no presumptions about any future role for myself and only speak for myself,” he wrote, nine months before assuming his current role.  Hegseth and President Donald Trump have in the past expressed strong support for the agreement. “This is not a mission to the Indo-Pacific that America can undertake by itself,” Hegseth said in February, following a meeting with his counterparts. “It has to be robust allies and partners. Technology sharing and [submarines] are a huge part of it.” The agreement, signed in 2021, includes plans to sell U.S. submarines to Australia, increase the members’ ability to operate together under U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, and share other technology. Congress authorized the sub sale two years later, with an 87-13 vote in the Senate and 310-188 in the House of Representatives. Hegseth let on during the hearing that the first part of the agreement might be the source of the concern. “So we are reviewing it, because thats what the Defense Department ought to do, to make sure it fits the priorities of the president and that our defense and shipbuilding industrial base can support,” he said. Lawmakers from both parties were immediately concerned about the review’s implications.  U.K. and Australian leaders voiced support for the review and confidence that AUKUS would continue. “Its a really important project,” British Prime Minister Keir Starmer told reporters Monday. “So I dont have any doubt that this will progress.” Congress is also looking for that reassurance, Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., told Hegseth on Wednesday. Asked later whether AUKUS could help the U.S. with nuclear deterrence in INDOPACOM, Hegseth hedged. “Working through AUKUS as a possible avenue for that is a good thing,” he said. ]]

[Category: Business]

— F-35 engine upgrade hits delay, casting doubt on timeline

 

at 6/18/25 1:54pm

PARIS—A key milestone for the Pentagon’s program to upgrade the F-35 engine has been pushed back a year, raising questions about the overall timeline of the effort.  The engine upgrade will reach “critical design review,” a milestone that essentially closes the design phase of the program, by “mid-next year,” according to Jill Albertelli, president of military engines for Pratt & Whitney—a year later than Pratt previously estimated.  The upgraded engines were supposed to hit the fleet by 2029, but Albertelli declined to confirm whether they will be ready by then, deferring specifics to the F-35 Joint Program Office. JPO did not respond in time for publication.  “We were working the timeline with the JPO because many things have to come in place: obviously I have to design, develop the engine, test it, deliver the hardware, all of that. But you also have certification with the jet, so were working very closely with Lockheed and the JPO on that timing. So well see how that ends up,” Albertelli told Defense One on the sidelines of the Paris Air Show.  Pratt declined to say why the delay is happening.  If the Engine Core Upgrade arrives later than expected, it wouldn’t hold up deliveries of F-35s, but it could affect the eventual retrofits of the jets. The upgrade was designed to improve the engine’s performance and provide the necessary power for a slew of improvements to the plane, known as Block 4. In 2023, the Pentagon decided to move ahead with the upgrade instead of developing a new, adaptive engine for the jet. Last July, ECU passed the preliminary design review.  The jet’s cooling system, called PTMS, also needs to be upgraded to handle more cooling beyond Block 4. Lockheed Martin has launched a competition between Honeywell, which makes the F-35’s current Power and Thermal Management System, and RTX, which is offering a new cooling system. The system picked won’t change the design of ECU, Albertelli said.  As the timeline for ECU remains murky, the Pentagon is also revising plans for Block 4 as a whole. Pentagon officials are “reimagining Block 4” to examine what industry can deliver since costs have skyrocketed and delays have plagued the effort. The “reimagine” won’t change much for Pratt, Albertelli said, since the specific requirements for the engine upgrade have already been locked in with JPO. Having those requirements “allows us to design and continue to move forward. We still leave some flexibility in there if there are some slight modifications during the time period. A normal engine development program would do that,” she said.  Beyond ECU, Pratt is pushing forward with its adaptive engine program, called Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion. The Air Force is funding two companies through the development phase, Pratt and General Electric, and one will eventually build an adaptive engine for the service’s new sixth-gen F-47. Albertelli didn’t disclose a specific timeline for their NGAP offering, but said the effort is going “extremely well” and that Pratt is “on the timeline of the U.S. Air Force.” “It is 100% digital, so its more efficient, its collaborative design, and my customer is in a collaborative digital environment along that journey with me. So that means theres no surprises along the way,” she said.   Pratt and GE both won a $3.5 billion contract in January to continue NGAP development, with work set to complete in 2032. However, the Pentagon seems to be slowing funding for the effort in initial 2026 budget documents, decreasing from $507 million in the 2025 budget to $330 million in the 2026 request.  When asked about the proposed decrease in funding, Albertelli said its still “very early” in the budget process.  “What hasnt changed is the threat of the adversary, and I think that that concern alone is just, theres a lot of conversations, a lot of briefings that Ive been doing on the Hill as well to make sure people understand all the information around it. We are full steam ahead at this point, and we are on contract for that as well,” she said. ]]

[Category: Business]

— ‘Yesterday’s facilities,’ unstable workforce among base commanders’ worries

 

at 6/18/25 12:51pm

BALTIMORE—Some military bases and installations are hundreds of years old, badly in need of maintenance or perhaps simply retirement. Others lack power and water that could be relied upon in wartime, or broadband and other digital infrastructure to meet today’s needs. “Essentially, we’re fighting tomorrow’s wars with yesterday’s facilities, and we need to fix that,” Brig. Gen. Andrew W. Collins, assistant adjutant general of the Maryland Army National Guard, said Tuesday at the Maryland Defense Forum. Collins joined other Maryland commanders in laying out their concerns at the two-day event, hosted by the state’s government to bring leaders from installations, defense communities and defense-related industries. It’s a similar story at the U.S. Coast Guard Yard on Curtis Bay, which provides shipyard services for the Coast Guard fleet and others, but lacks the space for larger ships, including the new generation of cutters. Capt. Emily Tharp, the yard’s commanding officer, said there are other pressing challenges too. A sinkhole opened in the facility, she said, trapping a tractor-trailer that was delivering a new engine for a cutter in the maintenance shop. It also has caused bottlenecks as vehicles and workers must navigate it, and the yard lacks the money to fix it fully. “In the world of ship repair, its all about minimizing the amount of time youre crisscrossing that facility, because its time and materials, bringing things on and off that ship, and you need heavy lift equipment to be able to get those things on and off the ship as you repair them,” Tharp said. “We are handcuffed every day because that sinkhole is in the main area where you need to do main transits from the outfitting piers back to the shops.” Budget constraints are also a big concern across military bases and installations, especially as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth shifts billions of dollars in the Pentagon budget, including stripping projects intended to harden bases against climate change. Given recent budget trends, Collins said, a National Guard installation can expect to be upgraded every 10 to 12 years, meaning that it could take 270 years to upgrade every facility in Maryland.  That’s “not quite tenable,” he said. And it’s a similar story for the Coast Guard’s shipyard, which Tharp said last saw a major investment during World War II but needs upgrades to handle maintenance for new, more technically advanced Coast Guard cutters. Space constraints have forced the shipyard to sign a memorandum of understanding with the Army Reserve Depot to have 20 ships docked with them for maintenance on the other side of Curtis Bay, just south of Baltimore.  Modernization will be a “huge endeavor,” she said. A lack of skilled workers is also weighing heavily on base commanders, with those budgetary concerns and the federal hiring freeze contributing to that too. Many Coast Guard shipyard workers are the fourth or fifth generation of their family to do so, which makes for a “proud workforce,” Tharp said, but portends a major brain drain when they retire. Meanwhile, those coming into the workforce struggle with basics like using certain hand tools or reading a tape measure, she said, so a lot of training is needed to get them up to speed. “Were really focusing on craftsmanship and knowing their job, so that way when the call comes, we have to step up and respond, we are ready, and we can give that much more,” Tharp said. “Were just not there.” Recruiting for other roles on base is just as challenging. Capt. Ryan Gaul, who leads Naval Support Activity Washington in the nation’s capital, said the base is competing with 38 other state, local and federal law enforcement agencies in the area to recruit for security and police roles. “Getting those folks to do this thankless job and work long hours in a critical role is something that were constantly working very hard to do,” Gaul said. “And those folks are protecting some very senior people doing some critical missions.” Gaul’s installation is in an urban area, which makes security challenging even without policing shortages, he said. Given how attacks can be directly targeted at installations, he is worried about drones, and also the everyday worries of being in a city. “I want to understand whats really behind seemingly innocuous acts that take place at my installation,” Gaul said. “Is that person who made an unauthorized access attempt somebody who got lost on their GPS, or are they probing? Is that person who took a picture outside of my gate a tourist who really likes that cool anchor on M Street in D.C.? Or are they doing surveillance or something for later on?” Despite the challenges, base leaders said they remain determined to be “good neighbors,” Gaul said.  Col. Christopher Chung, garrison commander at Fort Detrick in Frederick, Maryland, noted that the base is the largest employer in the city and provides $12 billion in regional impact, but it also wants to help invest in widening roads, more resilient sewers and other avenues that can benefit the community at large. For Gaul, a major issue is parking, as the 17,000 employees at the facility in the Navy Yard neighborhood must now report to work every day and be faced with just 4,473 parking spots. More transit connections would be ideal, he said, while he sees it as imperative to avoid being the reason for traffic gridlock. “I never thought I’d spend so much time on parking in my entire life,” Gaul said. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— The D Brief: Will US strike Iran?; China’s orbital gray zone; Army’s artillery production; Europe’s fighter-jet spat; And a bit more.

 

at 6/18/25 9:09am

Escalation watch: Iran is reportedly ready to strike U.S. military bases in the Middle East should President Trump decide to enter Israel’s war with Iran, U.S. officials told the New York Times Tuesday.  However, “Iran’s missile barrages in the recent conflict are much smaller compared to its barrages in its October 2024 attack on Israel,” analysts at the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War wrote in their Tuesday evening assessment. This apparent reduction in Iranian missile counter-attacks suggests Israeli strikes (like this) so far have been considerably effective against Iranian missile launchers. Consider, ISW writes, “Iran launched around 200 ballistic missiles in two waves in October 2024, whereas Iran used 30 to 40 missiles per barrage on June 16. Iran used 20 missiles in its largest barrage and two missiles in its smallest barrage on June 17, moreover.” New: The U.S. military has reportedly withdrawn from two more of its bases inside Syria, Reuters reported Tuesday. The Al-Wazir and Tel Baydar bases are both in northeastern Syria. U.S. troops have now withdrawn from four bases inside Syria since Trump took office, according to Reuters.  Why it matters: “Several Kurdish officials told Reuters that Islamic State [militants] had already begun moving more openly around U.S. bases which had recently been shuttered, including near the cities of Deir Ezzor and Raqqa, once strongholds for the extremist group.” More, here.  Developing: More U.S. military assets have arrived to the region, as open-source watchers like Avi Scharf of Haaretz shared on social media early Wednesday. He spotted the movement of several C-17 cargo planes, and speculated about the possible transit of F-22s and F-16s. Coverage continues after the jump… 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 1981, the U.S. Air Force’s F-117 Nighthawk flew for the first time. Heads up: “Israel doesn’t have the massive munition it would take to destroy [Iran’s] Fordo nuclear fuel enrichment plant, or the aircraft needed to deliver it. Only the U.S. does,” Lita Baldor of the Associated Press reported Tuesday.  “The Air Force’s B-2 Spirit stealth bomber is the only aircraft that can carry the 30,000-pound GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, known as the bunker buster,” Baldor writes. “There are currently no B-2 bombers in the Middle East region, although there are B-52 bombers based at Diego Garcia, and they can deliver smaller munitions. If tapped for use, the B-2 bombers would have to make the 30-hour round trip from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri, refueling multiple times.” For the record: U.S. “Fighter jets have joined in launching strikes to defend Israel, but officials said Tuesday that no American aircraft were over Iran,” according to Baldor. Read more about additional U.S. military assets in the region, here.  By the way: CENTCOM chief Gen. Erik Kurilla has reportedly had “nearly all” his requests approved by the White House in the current conflict, according to Politico. Also worth noting: “Kurilla’s arguments to send more U.S. weapons to the region, including air defenses, have gone against Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine and Pentagon policy chief Elbridge Colby, who have urged caution in overcommitting to the Middle East.” ICYMI: Trump dangled the threat of assassination over Iran’s leader, writing on social media Tuesday, “We know exactly where the so-called ‘Supreme Leader’ is hiding…We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don’t want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers.” Trump on Monday used social media to ominously instruct Tehran’s 10 million residents to “immediately evacuate” the city, without exactly saying why. He later wrote in a separate, much-shorter post Tuesday, “UNCONDITIONAL SURRENDER!”  Iran’s POV: “The Iranian nation cannot be surrendered,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said in a televised statement Wednesday. “The Americans should know that any U.S. military intervention will undoubtedly be accompanied by irreparable damage,” he added.  Latest from Trump: “I may do it,” he told reporters on the White House lawn Wednesday regarding the U.S. military joining Israel’s war. “I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I’m going to do.” Second opinion: “Donald Trump appears to be about to take the country to war in Iran,” warns media watchdog Dan Froomkin, writing Tuesday. “That could range from sending B-2s to blow up Iran’s heavily bunkered nuclear facility, to killing the Iranian leader, to bombing Tehran (‘evacuate immediately,’ he posted on Monday).” “I would like reporters to clarify that bombing Iran is, indeed, an act of war—and that it is Congress, not the president, that has the constitutional authority to declare war,” Froomkin says. He continues, “I want journalists to remember the lessons that should have been learned after Vietnam, and then again after Iraq, and demand answers of public officials before the war—if there’s still time. That means insisting that officials prove to the public that going to war will make things better rather than worse—and that it’s not just about satisfying some short-term urge.” Continue reading, here.  Additional reading (via Elizabeth Saunders of Columbia University):  “Catastrophic Success: Why Foreign-Imposed Regime Change Goes Wrong,” by Alexander B. Downes of George Washington University, published December 2021;  “Strongmen and Straw Men: Authoritarian Regimes and the Initiation of International Conflict,” by Jessica L. Weeks of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, writing in 2012;  “Coercion and the Credibility of Assurances,” by researchers Matthew D. Cebul, Allan Dafoe, and Nuno P. Monteiro, writing in July 2021;  “The New Nuclear Age: At the Precipice of Armageddon,” by Ankit Panda of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, writing in February;  “Seeking the Bomb: Strategies of Nuclear Proliferation,” by Vipin Narang of MIT, writing in January 2022;  And “Influence without Arms:The New Logic of Nuclear Deterrence,” from Matthew Fuhrmann of Texas A&M University, writing in October.  Around the Defense Department Today on Capitol Hill, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Air Force Gen. Dan Caine are discussing the Defense Department’s budget request before the Senate Committee on Armed Services. That began at 9:30 a.m. ET; livestream what’s left, here.  Also: Army Secretary Dan Driscoll and service chief Gen. Randy George are discussing the Army’s budget request before Senate appropriators’ defense subcommittee. Livestream here.  Coming soon: the submariner nominated to end the unprecedented gap between CNOs. It’s Adm. Daryl Caudle, who has led Fleet Forces Command in Norfolk, Va., since 2021, and earlier in his career commanded three attack submarines, an unusual achievement. USNI News has a bit more.  Caudle’s name began surfacing as a CNO candidate last month, when Politico wrote that he “has been unusually blunt in calling out failures in the defense industrial base. ‘I am not forgiving of the fact they’re not delivering the ordnance we need,’ Caudle said in 2023 when defense contractors were slow to restock the Navy’s depleted weapons arsenal. He has also criticized the service’s lack of public shipyards to maintain warships and said the Navy should be ‘embarrassed’ that it can’t develop lasers to provide air defense aboard ships.” Trump moved Greenland to NORTHCOM. DOD announced Tuesday that the Danish territory, long under the U.S. European Command’s area of responsibility, has been moved to Northern Command’s AOR to “strengthen the Joint Forces ability to defend the U.S. homeland.” Unmentioned went Trump’s imperialist designs on the world’s largest island. The Army heads toward 100,000 artillery shells per month. The service  has nearly tripled its production of 155mm howitzer shells since the Ukraine war began, millions of which have been sent to that country’s front lines. It’s going to miss its goal of making 100,000 per month by October, but likely by just a few months. Defense One’s Meghann Myers reports, here. China in space Space is increasingly looking like the South China Sea—that is, a domain for gray-zone warfare, Defense One’s Patrick Tucker reports from the 8th annual Space Security Conference in Prague.  The gist: “China describes its space activity—including the deployment of highly maneuverable satellites, satellites equipped with robotic arms, and moon missions—as nonmilitary. But officials from the United States and Taiwan, as well as independent space experts, worry that China is ‘rehearsing’ how to use satellites as space weapons in the opening days of an invasion. They also fear China is positioning itself to press other nations into accepting whatever space activities Beijing defines as ‘normal.’ Read on, here. European cooperation France and Germany are bickering in public over workshare for Europe’s next-gen fighter program, a dynamic that doesn’t bode well for the continent’s efforts to build up military capability. Defense One’s Audrey Decker has more on that from the Paris Air Show, here. Admin note: Thursday is Juneteenth, a federal holiday. So we’ll see you again on Friday! ]]

[Category: Threats]

— China is bringing gray-zone warfare to space

 

at 6/17/25 3:27pm

PRAGUE—China describes its space activity—including the deployment of highly maneuverable satellites, satellites equipped with robotic arms, and moon missions—as nonmilitary. But officials from the United States and Taiwan, as well as independent space experts, worry that China is “rehearsing” how to use satellites as space weapons in the opening days of an invasion.  They also fear China is positioning itself to press other nations into accepting whatever space activities Beijing defines as “normal.” Speaking at the 8th annual Space Security Conference here this week, Holmes Liao, a senior adviser to the Taiwan Space Agency, said China’s recent space activities are “not just logical demonstrations, but could be, maybe, rehearsals for future space design operations.” Those activities include the use of several satellites to perform complex maneuvers—what Gen. Michael Guetlein, vice chief the U.S. Space Force, described in March as “dogfighting” in space, a term Liao echoed on Monday. Liao also recounted a January 2024 incident in which China launched a rocket from the Xichang Satellite Launch Center in Sichuan province: “Because of the trajectory,” he said, “Taiwanese radar picked up the launch as an incoming missile.” That incident reflects an increasingly common Chinese tactic: using military exercises, launches or air patrols to trigger alarms in Taiwan. Last week, at the GLOBSEC security forum—also in Prague—Taiwan’s foreign minister, Chen Ming-tong, said China’s “gray zone” operations are designed to strain Taiwan’s readiness and response capacity—sometimes by literally exhausting radar operators or pilots. The term refers to coercive actions that fall below the threshold of armed conflict. [[Related Posts]] Chen added that China is extending similar tactics to Taiwan’s partners, including Japan. The recent deployment of two aircraft carriers near Japan “serves the same purpose—to exhaust their capability to meet the challenge,” he said. Like Liao, Chen used the word “rehearsal” to characterize the intent. “That activity looks and smells less like an exercise. It’s more like a rehearsal of a large-scale invasion,” he said. China’s behavior in orbit mirrors its strategy at sea, said John Huth, director of the Defense Intelligence Agencys Office of Space and Counterspace. “I think the South China Sea is the perfect example of what the CCP does when they develop leverage,” Huth said. “There were simply atolls there that they added sand to. They created an airfield, they put leverage on it, and they now defend it with their coast guard vessels. They did that in an area with overlapping territorial claims from their neighbors.” China’s ultimate goal could be extending that strategy into space where the territory could be the orbital trajectory of a satellite, a constellation of satellites, or even dominance of the moon, Huth said. “If they are the first to land on the moon and deliver a cislunar base, that puts them in the driver’s seat.” Chen said Taiwan, for its part, is adapting to reduce fatigue and resource strain. “We don’t have enough ships to ship-by-ship and plane-by-plane [assets] to scramble and meet the challenge at sea. So we have to come up with some more innovative way to deal with that.” That includes using artificial intelligence to analyze a broader range of satellite and other sensor data to determine whether Chinese maneuvers are routine or a precursor to attack. Taiwan is applying the same AI-assisted analysis to counter Chinese gray-zone tactics in orbit, Liao said. The Taiwan Space Agency is building a space surveillance center where operators will use AI and space situational awareness data to better interpret satellite maneuvers and rocket launches. Both missions require vast amounts of data, particularly radar. But while ground- and sea-based radar are common, space-based radar is much more rare. Tony Frazier, CEO of space radar company LeoLabs, said demand for space-based radar to track objects in orbit is rising globally.  “We see demand in Asia. We signed [a memorandum of understanding] with Singapore,” Frazier said. “There are other activities progressing in our pipeline, and I see similar opportunities emerging in Europe and the Middle East,” in addition to ongoing work with the U.S. government. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Army expects to make more than a million artillery shells next year

 

at 6/17/25 12:16pm

The U.S. Army has nearly tripled its production of 155mm howitzer shells since the Ukraine war began, millions of which have been sent to that country’s front lines. It’s going to miss its  goal of making 100,000 per month by October, but likely by just a few months. The service’s current monthly output stands at 40,000, up from 14,500 when Russia launched its full-scale invasion more than three years ago, according to data provided by the Army. The original plan called for making about twice as many by now. “Several of the investments that we made are just coming online now, a little later than we had hoped, but these were big bets, and we were given the mission to go fast,” Maj. Gen. John Reim, head of the joint armaments and ammunitions program executive office, told Defense One. “We put multiple bets down, and realized some risk…but we will continue to work through that.” In February 2024, the Army announced that it aimed to produce 60,000 shells per month that October, 75,000 in April 2025, and 100,000 by this October. So far the service has funneled nearly $5 billion into the project, mostly through supplemental funding, upgrading existing plants as well as opening new ones. Reim himself has attended seven ribbon-cuttings and groundbreakings. “You know, I tell folks all the time that were literally making history, and that weve not seen this level of investment in our industrial base since World War II,” he said.  The investment could be a model for the other services, like the Navy, whose leaders and advocates in Congress have said time and again desperately needs investment in its shipbuilding industrial base. Making a plan Most of the Army’s ammunition manufacturing facilities opened during World War II, Reim said. Service leaders made only minimal upgrades to those plants in the decades that followed, a policy that accepted a certain amount of risk, he said.  A new ground war in Europe, and a would-be ally’s desperate cries for anti-tank rounds, forced their hand. So in 2022, the service submitted the Army Ammunition Plant Modernization Plan. It laid out  broad goals like increasing automation and producing more materials in the United States, as well as specific projects, like opening up a facility to produce nitrocellulose – an ingredient in all ammunition propellants – at Radford Army Ammunition Plant in Virginia. “At the same time, the Ukraine war started to get hot and heavy, and we were given the edict that’s like, ‘hurry up and go fast’,” Reim said.  That included surging production at existing facilities such as the Scranton Army Ammunition Plant.  “They quickly went from a single shift to three shifts, largely running almost 24/7,” Reim said.  A new facility then opened in Mesquite, Texas, with the capacity to crank out 30,000 rounds a month, followed by another in Canada, which is just coming online at a rate of 10,000 a month, he said. The latest, opening in April in Camden, Arkansas, will crank out another 50,000 per month. Another in Parsons, Kansas, should open later this summer, Reim said, with an estimated rate of 12,000 per month. Once those are at full production, likely early next year, the Army will surpass that 100,000 rounds-per-month goal. At the same time, the effort has pushed the Army to re-open old production lines. The U.S. hasn’t manufactured its own TNT since 1986. Instead, Reim said, the Army had been buying it from Ukraine and Russia, which of course are no longer options. The service has since found vendors in South America, Australia and Asia, and has secured funding for new TNT facilities. “Weve learned a lot of lessons from our Ukraine experience, and were just so fortunate that were learning that now, and not with our blood and treasure on the line,” Reim said. ]]

[Category: Defense Systems]

— Spat over Europe’s next-gen fighter program spills over at Paris Air Show

 

at 6/17/25 11:55am

PARIS—Companies building a next-generation combat fighter for France, Germany, and Spain are publicly sparring over development of the program.  Germany’s Airbus and France’s Dassault Aviation are working alongside Spain’s Indra Sistemas to build a sixth-gen fighter jet called Future Combat Air System, or FCAS, but Airbus and Dassault have run into problems over how to share the work, creating a tough environment, Jean-Brice Dumont, head of air power at Airbus, told reporters Tuesday at the Paris Air Show.  While Dassault, which builds the Rafale jet, is the prime contractor of the New Generation Fighter, or NGF (the main aspect of FCAS), Airbus represents Germany and Spain, meaning Airbus carries two-thirds of the vote—a set-up Dassault dislikes. “We dont challenge that there is an appointed leader for the fighter program. That leader is Dassault,” but “we have to claim that there is an even share corresponding to the share of our governments that doesnt have to become toxic in the program,” Airbus’s Dumont said.  Dumont’s statement follows recent comments from Dassault CEO Eric Trappier that the French company should lead the effort. Trappier also opened the door to the company pulling out of the program completely, according to Bloomberg, and suggested that equally shared work would result in worse technology. [[Related Posts]] The strain and possible delay of the program is not a positive sign for Europe as it tries to bolster its military capabilities and boost defense budgets to prepare for potential aggression from Russia and the U.S. possibly withdrawing forces from Europe.  Dumont compared the situation to two competitors having to “marry,” which creates a “natural paradox” because each entity wants to protect its intellectual property.   “We are today married with BAE and Leonardo in the Eurofighter program. Tomorrow with Dassault, and the transition from one to the other isnt an easy transition when we have to protect our IP and tomorrow we will have to share everything, and I believe thats one of the sources of tensions in this program,” Dumont said.  However, Airbus maintained that the program is still possible with “smart workshare” and “proper rules of engagement.”  For now, the program isn’t stopping, but the companies are figuring out how to execute differently to meet its schedule, Dumont said. Europe is also working on a sixth-generation fighter jet program called Global Combat Air Programme, or GCAP. That program, sponsored by the U.K., Italy, and Japan,  seems to be making more progress than FCAS, with a new design rolled out last year during the Farnborough Air Show. GCAP is slated to come online around 2035, while FCAS has slipped from 2040 to 2045, or later.  Meanwhile, the U.S. is blazing ahead with its sixth-gen F-47, which is set to enter service before 2029. During the rollout, Trump entertained the idea of an exportable version of the Boeing jet, but it remains to be seen whether Congress could prohibit exports, or whether other countries would want to buy it.   “Certain allies we’ll be selling them, perhaps toned-down versions. We like to tone them down about 10 percent which probably makes sense, because someday, maybe theyre not our allies,” Trump said in March.  ]]

[Category: Business]

— The D Brief: Israel’s new war aim; NATO’s new concepts; China’s drones; Misinfo follows MN murders; And a bit more.

 

at 6/17/25 9:20am

The Israeli Defense Forces says it killed another top Iranian commander as Israel continues pressing its “pre-emptive” war against Iran, ostensibly to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon.  Latest: After four days of intense air and missile attacks, Israeli leaders are now “contemplating regime change in the Islamic Republic,” Axios reported Tuesday following various interviews—including this one on Fox—that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has given since Sunday. When asked on Fox if “regime change” was part of Israel’s goals, Netanyahu replied, “Could certainly be the result because the Iran regime is very weak.” He reiterated that point several more times Monday, including on an Iranian opposition program with the unsubtle title, “Regime Change In Iran.” About that Iranian commander Israel says it has killed: His name is Ali Shadmani, and the IDF claimed Tuesday he was “Iran’s senior-most military official” and the “closest military advisor” to Iran’s leader, Ali Khamenei. The IDF says Shadmani “was killed in an [Israeli air force] strike in central Tehran, following precise intelligence.” By the way, U.S. President Trump on Monday called for the 10 million people in Tehran to evacuate the city, writing on social media before departing a conference of G7 leaders early, “IRAN CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON. I said it over and over again! Everyone should immediately evacuate Tehran!” Trump also said Tuesday he’s trying to get Iran to the negotiating table sometime this week, and could dispatch Middle East Envoy Steve Witkoff or Vice President JD Vance for that job.  In video: Get to better know Iran’s underground Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, which has so far apparently gone undamaged, and how U.S.-made bunker-buster bombs could change the direction of the conflict. David Risling of the Associated Press posted a 70-second video on Tuesday.  Warning for Golden Dome salesmen: “Iran has been firing barrages of ballistic missiles at Israel. Even the world’s best defenses can’t always stop them,” the New York Times reports in a new multimedia feature all about “How Missile Defense Works (and Why It Fails).” Additional reading:  “Oil Tankers Collide Near U.A.E. as Israel-Iran Conflict Disrupts Shipping,” the Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday; “Airports close across the Mideast as the Israel-Iran conflict shutters the region’s airspace,” AP reported Monday;  “How Israel used spies, smuggled drones and AI to stun and hobble Iran,” also via AP, reporting Tuesday; “G7 leaders: ‘Iran can never have a nuclear weapon’,” Politico reported Tuesday from Canada. 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 2015, a 21-year-old white supremacist shot and killed nine Black Americans during a Bible study at the Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church in Charleston, South Carolina. Defense industry Boeing says they can build F/A-XX and F-47. The company’s defense chief rejected the Navy secretary’s contention that U.S. defense companies can’t handle building two sixth-generation fighter jets at once. “Absolutely we can do it, and so can the industrial base, and so can the engine manufacturers. So I dont see that as being an issue,” Steve Parker told reporters Monday. Defense One’s Audrey Decker reports from the Paris Air Show. Lockheed: TR-3 upgrade package for F-35 is ready. Nearly two years late, Technology Refresh 3 now merely awaits government approval, officials said in Paris. Decker, here.  Related reading: “Video: Trump’s Policies Create Turbulence for the F-35” and its foreign operators and potential buyers: a WSJ project. “OpenAI wins $200 million US defense contract”...to “develop prototype frontier AI capabilities to address critical national security challenges,” Monday’s contract announcement says. Reuters has a tiny bit more, here. “Lawmakers Demand Palantir Provide Information About U.S. Contracts,” NYT reports. ICYMI: Trump administration officials have “said the White House was laying the groundwork, partly by using Palantir technology, to consolidate data across the government so it could potentially compile a master list of personal information on Americans.” Troops on U.S. soil Developing: U.S. appeals court to rule on Trump’s dispatch of troops to LA. “A three-judge panel will determine whether National Guard troops can remain under President Trump’s command in Los Angeles as protests against immigration raids continue,” the New York Times writes. Find related coverage from Reuters and AP. Domestic extremism The alleged shooter in the weekend killing of Democratic lawmakers in Minneapolis targeted several other officials’ homes that night, prosecutors said Monday as their investigation proceeds.  Authorities arrested the suspect, Vance Luther Boelter, Sunday and began piecing together his trail of carnage that began around 2 a.m. Saturday morning when he dressed as a masked police officer and shot and wounded Minn. State Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette. He then visited the homes of two more elected officials, one of whom was not there, before visiting a fourth home where he fatally shot former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark at about 3:30 a.m. The Associated Press mapped the attacks across the city, here.  “It is no exaggeration to say that his crimes are the stuff of nightmares,” acting U.S. Attorney Joseph Thompson told reporters Monday. “Political assassinations are rare. They strike at the very core of our democracy. But the details of Boelter’s crime are even worse. They are truly chilling,” he said.  He kept a list of targets in his car. “Court records said the lists contained names and home addresses of mostly or all Democrats,” the Wall Street Journal reports, noting, “more than 45 state and federal elected officials, including those who support abortion rights.”Worth noting: “Friends and former colleagues interviewed by AP described Boelter as a devout Christian who attended an evangelical church and went to campaign rallies for President Donald Trump,” the Associated Press reported Monday evening. He’s also “not believed to have made any public threats before [the] attacks,” according to prosecutors. Read more, here.   The case has also triggered a storm of misinformation from the right: “MAGA voices spread falsehoods to link Minnesota shooter to Democrats” including the presidents son and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah, Axios reports. “‘Psyop’: How Far-Right Conspiracy Theories About the Minnesota Shooting Evolved to Protect MAGA,” WIRED reports. Involved “influencers” include Alex Jones and Elon Musk. Additional reading:  “Security briefings crash into the once-quiet life of state lawmakers,” Politico reports; “Mike Lee Draws Outrage for Posts Blaming Assassination on the Far Left,” the New York Times reported Monday;  And relatedly, “‘This is not a joke’: Sen. Amy Klobuchar rips Mike Lee for posts about a deadly Minnesota shooting,” the Salt Lake Tribune reported Monday. NATO news Inside the alliance’s new Russia deterrence plans. European officials worry that NATO’s ambitious targets for military capability may not be enough to deter Russia from “testing” how the alliance would respond to an attack on a member nation in the next three to five years, Defense One’s Patrick Tucker reports off conversations at the GLOBSEC security conference in Prague.  So at the NATO summit later this month, members will discuss new operational concepts to respond immediately to a Russian attack—including counterstrikes inside Russia. “The new concept is that if Russia is coming, then we will bring the war to Russia. Thats what we are talking about,” Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna told Tucker. “We have no time then to discuss whether we can use one of the other weapons or whatever. We have no time. We need to act within the first minutes and hours.” Read on, here. Meanwhile: “At G7, Trump Renews Embrace of Putin Amid Rift With Allies,” the New York Times reported from Alberta.  Related reading:  “NATO allies ‘not prepared’ for war, top UK defense adviser warns,” writes Politico off a conversation with Grace Cassy, an adviser to the British government’s defense review. “Britains MI6 spy agency gets its first female chief,” AP reports: Blaise Metreweli, currently “the MI6 director of technology and innovation — the real-world equivalent of Bond gadget-master Q.” Drones Chinas burgeoning drone arsenal shows the power of its civil-military fusion. “On June 6, President Trump signed two executive orders designed to build back up the U.S. civilian drone industry: one orders various agencies to promote American drone exports, and the other limits government purchases of drones linked to the Chinese government,” write BluePath Labs’ John S. Van Oudenaren and New America’s Peter W. Singer. “Whether these measures are too little, too late to turn around a global market that has been dominated by China for over a decade remains to be seen. But what it does miss is that China’s drone industry is not merely a story of civilian systems, but of military ones as well—and a strategic plan that yokes multiple parts of government and industry to a central goal.” Read on, here. Meanwhile, the U.S. Navy showed off its giant Triton drone and how it will operate with the P-8 maritime patrol aircraft. Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams went to Naval Air Station Pax River, Maryland, to watch. Read, here. ]]

[Category: Threats]

— China's burgeoning drone arsenal shows power of civil-military fusion

 

at 6/17/25 7:00am

On June 6, President Trump signed two executive orders designed to build back up the U.S. civilian drone industry: one orders various agencies to promote American drone exports, and the other limits government purchases of drones linked to the Chinese government. Whether these measures are too little, too late to turn around a global market that has been dominated by China for over a decade remains to be seen. But what it does miss is that China’s drone industry is not merely a story of civilian systems, but of military ones as well—and a strategic plan that yokes multiple parts of government and industry to a central goal. The PLA’s interest in drones is extensive, as is often observed around Taiwan. Drones participated in joint exercises around the island in August 2022, April 2023, May 2024, October 2024, and April 2025. UAVs are a regular presence in PLA incursions around Taiwan’s periphery, indicating that they would likely factor heavily in any Taiwan Strait conflict. And high- and low-end UAVs reportedly figure in its simulations of Strait scenarios. Nevertheless, the PLA is apparently still determining what kind of UAVs it needs—perhaps long-endurance drones operating alone on strike or ISR missions, autonomous drone swarms of different types (including “mothership warfare”), or manned-unmanned teams like larger drones as “loyal wingmen” for piloted fighter jets.  To this end, China is closely monitoring the role of drones in contemporary military conflict, especially in the Russia-Ukraine War. In particular, the PLA is drawing extensive lessons from its partnership with Russia, including concerning the use of swarms of expendable, ultra-low-cost drones that China could use its enormous industrial capacity to manufacture in large quantities. Like so much else, the Chinese Communist Party’s push for more robotic systems reflects its leaders’ vision for development. In his 2022 report to the 20th Party Congress, Xi Jinping called for accelerating the development of “unmanned intelligent combat forces.” Core PLA strategic texts recognize unmanned systems as integral to contemporary warfighting, and all PLA services and theater commands now use UAVs for a wide array of missions. These include intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance; maritime and border defense patrol; ground and naval strike; air-to-air combat; anti-submarine warfare; air defense suppression (including by using small UAV swarms); electronic warfare; communications support and data relay; transportation and logistical support; emergency medical support; firefighting; and information operations. There is also a growing trend towards more autonomous UAV systems. Two PLA Academy of Military Sciences experts recently observed that improvements in autonomous combat capabilities are shifting the usual ratio of humans to unmanned equipment from “many controlling one” (multiple people operating one unmanned platform) to “one controlling one” (one person controlling one UAV) to “one controlling many” (one person controlling many platforms). The drone troika A recent report highlights how these goals have been paired with the modernization and expansion of China’s military drone industry. China’s defense industrial base has used the military-civil fusion, or MCF, national development strategy to benefit from China’s dominance of the commercial drone industry. Drones, an inherently dual-use technology, have been a major MCF success story, due in part to their scalability, customizability, and generally lower start-up and production costs. While most Chinese defense-export sectors have been stagnant, drone exports have boomed. From 2018 to mid-2024, China accounted for more than one-quarter of global military drone sales. According to the Chinese Institute of Command-and-Control, a professional organization with extensive links to the PLA, “UAVs are the most representative products of military-civil fusion.” This success story reflects three categories of actors working together: state-owned enterprises; universities, especially those with a defense focus; and private or mixed-ownership companies. Like other sectors of China’s defense industry, UAV production is dominated by major defense- and aerospace-focused state-owned enterprises. Among these are: ● Aviation Industry Corporation of China. Ranked last year as the world’s second-largest defense firm, AVIC manufactures the medium-altitude, long-endurance Wing-Loong UAV series used by the PLA and exported to the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan. ● China Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation. CASC makes the Caihong (“Rainbow”) series of drones used by the PLA and exported to Algeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Indonesia, Iraq, Laos, Myanmar, and Pakistan. ● China North Industries Corporation, a.k.a. NORINCO. Ttraditionally focused more on land-based weaponry such as tanks and artillery, NORINCO appears to be a growing player in the UAV field, including through its 2023 acquisition of Xi’an Aisheng Group, long a major producer of drones for the PLA. ● Other major players include China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation, or CASIC, and China Electronics Technology Group Corporation. Defense-focused universities have also been key players in the development of China’s UAV sector. Ever since Beihang University carried out China’s first successful drone test in 1959, research on military drones in China has been spearheaded by universities—particularly members of the defense-focused consortium known as the “Seven Sons of National Defense,” including Beihang, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, and Northwestern Polytechnical University. All these universities receive extensive funding from major defense state-owned enterprises, with whom they cooperate on UAV research, testing, and development. For example, Beihang has a strategic cooperation agreement with CASC and numerous cooperative relationships with AVIC subsidiaries. In 2023, the university also signed an investment and R&D cooperation agreement with NORINCO, which gained a majority stake in a Beihang subsidiary that manufactures the PLA’s BZK-005 UAV. The final key set of actors in the troika advancing China’s military UAV industry are private or mixed-ownership companies. Most of the firms in this category manufacture drone components or parts. However, some of the more sophisticated and well-connected companies, such as Sichuan Tengden Technology, are increasingly prominent players, and have even begun to produce whole UAV platforms. Sichuan Tengden was founded by Nie Haitao, a former senior official at AVIC and an expert for the Central Military Commission’s Science and Technology Commission, showing the close relationship between these ostensibly private companies and China’s military-industrial complex. The TB-001 attack drone developed by Tengden has been spotted near Japanese airspace on several occasions, indicating it is likely in service with the People’s Liberation Army Eastern Theater Command, the main force tasked with Taiwan operations. As the Russia-Ukraine war has demonstrated, drones have gone from auxiliary players to game-changers in contemporary warfare. Should China ever move on Taiwan, the PRC would likely deploy UAVs on a scale unseen in human history. This would be made possible by China’s large civilian drone industry built up through military-civil fusion. And should the conflict drag on, China’s enormous manufacturing capacity would be a huge advantage. The recent executive orders signed at the White House may be a step toward mitigating that advantage—but they are just one step in a long race to catch up. John S. Van Oudenaren is a Research Analyst at BluePath Labs focused on Chinese foreign and defense issues. P.W. Singer is Strategist at New America and the author of multiple books on technology and security, including Wired for War, Ghost Fleet, Burn-In, and LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media. ]]

[Category: Ideas]

— The Navy’s dynamic sub-hunting duo

 

at 6/17/25 2:59am

NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, Md.—The Navy envisions future submarine-hunting operations with seamless data sharing between robot and human-piloted aircraft, and a boost from artificial intelligence to make sense of a complex maritime environment.  Platforms like Northrop Grumman’s MQ-4C Triton and Boeing’s P-8A Poseidon siphon a lot of data from their environment in real time.To make sense of it all and create a comprehensive intelligence and surveillance picture, the Navy uses Minotaur software to stitch several systems together—cameras, communications systems, and radars. “That Minotaur framework is the same framework that will be installed on the future P-8A increment 3 aircraft that are currently under development. So in a future world where we already have that framework on Triton, [the upgraded Poseidon] will adopt that framework. An operator on a Triton will have all the feeds that are provided by a Triton as well as P-8A…Support staff on the deck will have that same feed. So theyll see, in real time, what all the operators are seeing across the board,” said Capt. Josh Guerre, program manager for the Navy’s persistent maritime unmanned aircraft systems office.  The Navy split up the Triton program, which is based on the RQ-4 Global Hawk and will replace the EP-3E, into three increments, from initial capability to mission-ready “enhancements.”  A typical day for an intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance aircraft means flying for several hours at high altitude—about 50,000 feet for Triton—using its sensors to scan open water and coastal areas. That creates a ton of data. “There are thousands of contacts that youre registering with thousands of data sources coming in. So if an operator has to go in and click on each one to [visually] ID that to then understand what that is—thats very labor intensive,” Guerre told reporters, discussing the use for AI solutions. “What I see in the future is a system that can help narrow that down significantly: what are you looking for, what vessel length, what breadth. And then you put those parameters in, and its able to narrow in and say, ‘Hey, here are the 10 out of the 1,000 that fall within your description. Then you can go in and narrow in on those. So its really about resource management, where I believe were going to succeed” in the next five years. The Triton program now has 25 operational aircraft and one test aircraft. In fiscal year 2028, the Navy plans to deliver the first two units of its electro-optical/infrared camera upgrade, increment 2, which has a better turret and wide-area search mode allowing the camera to be used for video, stills and to “search for both sea-based targets as well as littoral land-based targets, where you can actually use the camera almost like a radar,” Guerre said. “That will correlate back into your overall [common operating picture], where youre receiving queuing from all these different sources.”  The plan is to retrofit all the Triton aircraft in the program to have the same kit over five years. Triton has sea-worthy upgrades from the Global Hawk, including a hardened fuselage and other features that allow it to transit weather layers and fly in icy conditions. But its the sensor suite of signals intelligence systems—including a multi-function active system radar, synthetic aperture radar, and electro-optical/infrared camera to detect moving ships on the water—that create the foundation for manned-unmanned teaming.  Northrop Grumman wants to use that “synergy” to expand Triton overseas to militaries with or looking to buy P-8As, and there are already discussions ongoing with Norway, Brad Champion, Northrop Grumman’s MQ-4C Triton enterprise director, told reporters.  “Any country that has a P-8A, we try to get in and show them the value of that manned-unmanned teaming,” Champion said. “From a U.S. Navy perspective, theres a lot of synergies between the operators, between P-8A and a Triton. The training aspect…theres common operators between those platforms. Other nations that are responsible for large maritime environments that have P-8A, they can benefit from that same synergy as well.” ]]

[Category: Defense Systems]

— ‘If Russia is coming, then we will bring the war to Russia’: Inside NATO’s muscular new deterrence plans

 

at 6/16/25 6:03pm

PRAGUE—European officials worry that NATO’s ambitious new targets for military capability may not be enough to deter Russia from “testing” how the alliance would respond to an attack on a member nation within the next three to five years.  Russian President Vladimir Putin increasingly perceives Europe to be weaker than it is, they say, while the White House fails to grasp the severity of the Russian threat. At the NATO summit later this month, members will discuss not only increased defense budgets, but also new operational concepts to respond immediately to a Russian attack—including counterstrikes inside Russia—Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna told Defense One at the GLOBSEC security conference. “The new concept is that if Russia is coming, then we will bring the war to Russia. Thats what we are talking about,” Tsahkna said. “We have no time then to discuss whether we can use one of the other weapons or whatever. We have no time. We need to act within the first minutes and hours.” That new doctrine builds on the regional defense plans NATO adopted at its 2023 summit, which centralized more authority under U.S. Gen. Christopher Cavoli, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, to respond rapidly— in coordination with Eastern European members—in the event of a Russian assault. However, this year’s summit will go further. It is expected to outline the specific capabilities Europe must field to be ready for conflict with Russia the day of an attack. “Now we have [capability targets] for this concept,” Tsahkna said. The upcoming summit is intended to accelerate the alliance’s readiness, said NATO official speaking on background. “We dont have 19 years to wait. No. Be ready to go now,” the official said. “And its not because the U.S. might be withdrawing forces or not committing forces or anything like that. It’s just, we need to be ready to go.” A senior European military official added that urgency is critical, noting, “We all agree that we need to strengthen the deterrence, because Russia may try something to test our Article 5 in three to five years. It takes six years to build a building in our [Ministry of Defense].” Gen. Karel Řehka, the Czech Republic’s military chief, said the new capability targets represent a significant departure from earlier plans, which often amounted to vague commitments. “They are really driven by threat. Not only threat, also innovation—but mostly by threat,” he said. NATO members have provisionally aligned on sweeping new capability targets and are expected to formally adopt national spending goals of 3.5% of gross domestic product on so-called “core” defense development.  “These capabilities, encompassing air defense, combat aircraft, tanks, drones, personnel, and logistics, among others, will keep our deterrence and defense strong and our one billion people safe,” NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said during a June 5 press conference. At the summit, members are also expected to agree to an additional 1.5% annual investment in infrastructure such as roads, electricity, and industry. NATO officials also told Defense One that development of space-based capabilities will be a priority. Washington and Europe: aligned, but not fully The 3.5% spending goal is widely viewed as a win for former President Donald Trump, who called for a similar increase on the campaign trail—a demand that drew quick support from a NATO official during last year’s GLOBSEC summit. Throughout the forum, however, European leaders repeatedly emphasized that while they seek to grow their own defense industries, they do not want to cut ties with the United States or American defense firms, which continue to supply arms and intelligence vital not only to Ukraine’s war effort, but to Europe’s own security. Still, concerns persist that U.S. commitment to NATO’s collective defense could shift under Trump. His past remarks—combined with reports that the White House has considered withdrawing troops from Europe or pulling back the U.S. nuclear umbrella—have sparked conversations in European capitals about relying more on France’s smaller nuclear arsenal for deterrence. But Jim Stokes, director of nuclear policy at NATO, dismissed those fears during a panel at GLOBSEC.  “The United States has been extremely clear that there is nothing changing with regard to its nuclear deterrence and its commitment,” he said. “That includes its posture within Europe. It includes its commitment to the allies, and it’s also about the commitment of our European allies and Canada.” A NATO official, speaking on background, echoed that message, but added that the White House contributed to the confusion. “The internal messaging is [now] very good. It’s gotten better. We’ve talked with them about what they’re saying. Now, they are very clear: we’re not gonna change anything on the nuclear side,” the official said. A March misstep and lingering doubts Defense, military, and industry officials also said they do not expect a repeat of the incident in March in which the United States briefly paused the sharing of intelligence with Ukraine—including commercial satellite imagery and data from U.S. companies—and prevented European allies from purchasing and passing that intelligence to Kyiv. But one senior European defense official said the move significantly damaged trust and dampened European enthusiasm to buy American weapons or data services. “There’s a question of trust, yeah? Whether we buy or not we buy from the United States. Can we use these systems? Can we use the jet fighters? This is the main, main concern,” the official said. That said, the official acknowledged that “the new approach from the White House on that subject is getting better and better.” A common understanding is beginning to emerge: NATO must invest more heavily in its own defense; the United States will maintain its nuclear deterrence presence in Europe; and U.S. defense and intelligence firms will continue to contribute—though increasingly at European taxpayer expense rather than through the U.S. defense budget. Yet differences in worldview remain, said Brian Finlay, president and CEO of the Stimson Center, speaking at GLOBSEC. Finlay said he has been in regular contact with White House officials. “The respective threat assessments here in Europe versus back in Washington are further apart than they have been at any time, perhaps since the end of the Cold War.” Putin, meanwhile, may be making a dangerous error built on similarly flawed perceptions, Řehka warned. “I think we are coming to the most dangerous situation since the end of the Cold War, and that’s Russia believing that Europe is weak. That’s really, really dangerous. It’s not true. But if Russia starts to believe that, then it increases the potential for miscalculation.” And if Russia acts on that belief, it will pay a price, the senior European defense official said.  “If we can fulfill our plans, the price for Russia will be pretty high [should it test NATO in a formal invasion or via some less-obvious attack]. But the turning point is actually what is going to happen with Ukraine, because [Putin’s] stuck there. The narrative that Russia is going to win very soon, it’s not correct.” ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Boeing says they can build F/A-XX *and* F-47, rejecting SecNav's concerns

 

at 6/16/25 3:12pm

PARIS—Boeing’s defense chief rejected the Navy secretary’s contention that U.S. defense companies can’t handle building two sixth-generation fighter jets at once. “Absolutely we can do it, and so can the industrial base, and so can the engine manufacturers. So I dont see that as being an issue,” Boeing defense and space CEO Steve Parker told reporters Monday at the Paris Air Show. The Navy’s F/A-XX program is in limbo after the service cut funding for the program in initial 2026 budget documents, a move Navy Secretary John Phelan said was driven by industry’s tardiness on other programs. But Boeing, which won the competition to build the F-47 sixth-generation fighter jet for the Air Force in March, said the company would be fine if it also won F/A-XX.  The company is spending almost $5 billion to build up its air-dominance facilities, with the intent to execute both programs, Parker said.  “From day one, a capital investment was for both programs. Weve done the same with our technology. Weve done the same with our staffing. I cant get too many staffing numbers, but we have a very large number of folks working on both programs.” [[Related Posts]] The decision lies with the government, but Parker said Navy leaders have made it clear that the service still needs a sixth-gen fighter jet. Congress also is fighting to keep the program alive and has added money to the reconciliation bill.  While Boeing hopes that F/A-XX will be saved, the company is pushing ahead with work on the F-47—emphasizing that no other aircraft will come close to it, including the F-35. After Boeing beat Lockheed Martin for the contract to build the F-47, Lockheed officials started pitching a “supercharged” version of the F-35 that they said could deliver 80 percent of sixth-gen capability at half the cost.  Parker said Boeing isn’t worried about that effort competing with the F-47.  “I get it when other companies have shareholders to answer to when theyve been knocked out of both sixth-gen fighter programs. But at the end of the day, I think the U.S. Air Force’s selection of the F-47…tells you all you need to. Only a sixth-generation aircraft, specifically developed and designed to meet the requirements of today and of the future—thats the only sensible solution,” Parker said. Air Force One update Boeing is also “very close” to finalizing the design of two new VC-25 presidential jets, Parker said, a program that is years behind schedule.  Air Force officials have said the delivery date could be pushed up to 2027 from the projected 2029 if some of the program’s stringent requirements are removed. Parker said the company’s work with Elon Musk—defense contractor and erstwhile advisor to President Trump—has been “helpful” in moving the project forward. “I would tell you that over the last four or five months, weve made more progress than weve made in the last four years. So the administration has been very, very helpful. Clearly, Elon was part of that, but the administration is much more than Elon, and that continues as we go forward,” he said.  Parker also said some of the initial requirements on the program were “physically impossible to do.”  Those requirements were set in a $3.9 billion fixed-price contract negotiated between Boeing’s then-CEO and first-term President Trump. The company has lost more than $2.4 billion on the deal so far. Trump has directed the Pentagon to modify a luxury 747 donated by the Qatari royal family for use as an interim Air Force One, a plan that has raised ethical and security concerns. It also remains unclear how the Pentagon will pay for the modifications, and how quickly the Air Force could acquire a third set of highly specialized systems.   Parker maintained said the Qatari-jet upgrades would not affect his company’s Air Force One program. “I cant get into any discussion on Aircraft Three, around configuration or whatever else. All I can talk about is VC-25B and I dont see any issue whatsoever, any impact of VC-25B from what the U.S. government might do there,” Parker said.  ]]

[Category: Business]

— Lockheed says new upgrade package for F-35 is ready

 

at 6/16/25 1:37pm

PARIS—Lockheed Martin says it has completed work on a long-delayed upgrade for the F-35, known at Technology Refresh 3, but the company is still awaiting formal approval from the government.  “What we have been working on throughout this process of getting TR-3 is to get the process stabilized to the point where it was consistently able to operate for the pilot. We believe we have reached that point,” J.R. McDonald, vice president of F-35 business development, told reporters Monday at the Paris Air Show.  There is one part of the upgrade that still needs approval from the government before it will be formally “combat capable,” McDonald said, but Lockheed believes “we’re very close to that.” Lockheed did not disclose what that remaining item is.  The software and hardware upgrade was originally supposed to be ready in April 2023, but challenges with software stability pushed the delivery of full TR-3 capability to 2025. The problems led the Pentagon to stop accepting new F-35s for a year, but officials ended that pause in July 2024. [[Related Posts]] Since then, the Pentagon has been accepting TR-3 jets with a “truncated” version of the TR-3 package, and has been withholding money from Lockheed until the full upgrade is complete.  “If you think about the airplanes coming off the line since last July, theyre all TR-3 hardware [and] software. Its all there. Now what we’re doing is we’re implementing software updates relative to that capability. We believe, as J.R. mentioned, we’re there. It’s [up to] our customer to decide whether or not that capability is combat capable, and we’re working with our customer in that regard,” said Greg Ulmer, head of Lockheed aeronautics. The new upgrade will be the backbone for Block 4 improvements: a suite of capabilities including a new processor, sensors, and weapons. But the exact plan for Block 4 is now in flux, since upgrade delays and cost overruns have forced the F-35 Joint Program Office to “reimagine” the program and figure out the “must-have” capabilities that industry will actually be able to deliver. JPO did not comment in time for publication.  ]]

[Category: Business]

— The D Brief: Israeli campaign ‘a blueprint’; War shadows Paris airshow; Defense execs turn Army O-5s; Marine detains LA vet; And a bit more.

 

at 6/16/25 9:56am

Iran and Israel continue their weekend of long-range attacks after Israel re-ignited tensions with a multi-phase operation of pre-emptive strikes on Iran’s military leadership and a uranium enrichment site early Friday, killing several top officials and scientists, and putting the region on high alert for a possibly widening conflict.  Outlook: Iran’s Foreign Ministry Sunday said its attacks on Israel would stop if Israel stops first. Israeli officials, for their part, have repeatedly said they’re prepared to fight for at least several more weeks in order to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Of note, Iran’s “most fortified nuclear facility,” the subterranean Fordow plant, remains undamaged, the Wall Street Journal reports. Latest: Israel jets targeted more Iranian intelligence officials inside Tehran on Monday, allegedly killing the intel chief for Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps and the intel chief for the IRCG’s elite Quds Forces, along with both men’s deputies, the Israeli Defense Forces announced on social media.  Other Israeli strikes are targeting alleged “trucks containing weapons, including surface-to-air missile launchers, advancing from western Iran toward Tehran,” the IDF said Monday, with accompanying strike footage. Those strikes come as Israeli forces continue working to neutralize Iran’s air defense assets ahead of Israeli bombing runs over the skies of Tehran.  Panning out: Israel has “expanded its air campaign into Iran by beginning to strike regime institutions, including some related to internal security and social control,” analysts at the Institute for the Study of War wrote Sunday evening. “This comes the day after the IDF began striking energy infrastructure. The degradation of the Iranian coercive apparatus coupled with energy shortages could destabilize the regime.” Iran says Israel’s strikes have killed more than 220 people since Friday, and more than 1,200 have been wounded. That death toll included at least “73 women and kids,” Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said on social media Sunday.  Tit for tat, says Iran’s top diplomat: “On the first night, we targeted only military objectives of the Israeli regime,” Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in a statement Monday. “However, when the Zionist regime escalated its aggression yesterday by attacking economic infrastructure—including the Tehran refinery and facilities in Asaluyeh—we responded last night by striking economic targets and refineries within the occupied territories of the Zionist regime.” Notable: Iranian missiles are still landing inside Israel, including more Monday that killed at least eight Israelis, the Associated Press reports. Iran has launched drones and more than 370 missiles at Israel since Friday, killing two dozen and wounding more than 500; on Saturday, Israel claimed to have shot down more than 90% of Iran’s missiles, according to Reuters. By Monday, the Israeli military claimed to “have achieved full aerial superiority over Tehran’s skies,” according to Brig. Gen. Effie Defrin.  U.S. military air defense assets in the region have helped Israel shoot down Iranian projectiles, AP reported Friday. The U.S. currently has about 40,000 troops in the region as well, officials said. More on all that, here.  Iran: “We have solid evidence of US forces and bases in the region assisting the Zionist regime’s attacks,” Foreign Minister Araghchi said Monday. “But more telling than our evidence are the explicit statements of the US president expressing support. Therefore, we consider the US complicit in these attacks and demand it take responsibility.” Developing: It looks like the U.S. Navy’s USS Nimitz aircraft carrier is heading toward the Middle East from the South China Sea, Reuters reported Monday citing shiptracking data available online. “The carrier had planned to visit [Vietnam’s] Danang City later this week, but two sources, including one diplomat, said a formal reception slated for June 20 had been called off.” A note on tactics: Israel’s opening salvo in this latest war “is a blueprint for future joint campaigns and suggests key investments the U.S. military will need to make to adapt to the changing character of war,” argued Benjamin Jensen of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies, writing Friday. “These include accelerating efforts to integrate special forces with low-cost drones—similar to the foundational work with Project Replicator—with long-range precision strike campaigns, alongside rethinking defense in depth to protect critical assets.”  Related reading:  “With No Clear Off-Ramp, Israel’s War With Iran May Last Weeks, Not Days,” the New York Times reported Monday;  “Israel Races to Reshape the Middle East With Few Checks,” the Wall Street Journal reported Sunday;  “Trump vetoed Israeli plan to kill Irans supreme leader, US officials say,” Reuters reported Sunday; “Iranian missiles penetrated Israel’s air defenses Friday. How ironclad is the system?” AP reported Friday. 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 1858, Abraham Lincoln delivered his “House Divided” speech in Springfield, Illinois. Defense industry “Theres more underlying [the Paris Air Show] than any one I’ve been to before,” said Eric Fanning, CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association, which convenes U.S. industry and government officials at overseas trade shows. The biennial airshow opens this week for a second edition shadowed by Russia’s war in Ukraine, and amid the second term of U.S. President Trump, who has weakened America’s commitment to NATO, urged European governments to boost their defense industries, and warned them not to stop buying American weapons. Defense One’s Audrey Decker has a curtain-raiser, here. Now Israel’s attacks on Iran have added yet another layer of friction. On Sunday, airshow organizers—acting at the request of the French government—told Israeli companies exhibiting at the show to remove “offensive weapons” from their displays. The companies protested that they didn’t have time before the show opened, so overnight, airshow organizers erected eight-foot barriers to block the view of the weapons from spectators. Defense News has a photo and more here. Stay tuned to Defense One for Decker’s dispatches from Paris this week.  New: Four tech execs are being commissioned as Army lieutenant colonels. Task & Purpose: “Four senior executives of tech giants like Meta and Palantir are being sworn into the Army Reserve as direct-commissioned officers at the unusually high rank of lieutenant colonel as part of a new program to recruit private-sector experts to speed up tech adoption.” Read on, here. Troops & immigrants New: U.S. Marine detains man on American soil. The man, a former Army combat engineer named Marcus Leao, told AP he was heading to a Veterans Affairs appointment and walked past a piece of caution tape outside the federal building. A Marine, one of the 700 who began operating in Los Angeles on Friday, detained and zip-tied him. Leao was later released; no charges were filed.  “The brief detention marked the first time federal troops have detained a civilian since they were deployed to the nation’s second-largest city by President Donald Trump in response to protests over the administration’s immigration arrests,” AP reports.  Why it matters: “Leao’s detention shows how the troops’ deployment is putting them closer to carrying out law enforcement actions. Already, National Guard soldiers have been providing security on raids as Trump has promised as part of his immigration crackdown.” Continue reading, here. Related reading: “Trump directs ICE to expand deportations in Democratic-run cities,” AP reports, adding that the administration has meanwhile “directed immigration officers to pause arrests at farms, restaurants and hotels, after Trump expressed alarm about the impact aggressive enforcement is having on those industries.”  “The Private Citizens Who Want to Help Trump Deport Migrants,” from the New Yorker, which adds: “For years, right-wing civilians have eagerly patrolled the border. Tom Homan, Trump’s border czar, has hinted that he might enlist their help.” Commentary: “An immigrant registry is un-American — and alarmingly familiar,” write Rabbi Mordechai Liebling and Pastor Julio Hernandez in The Hill: “The administration’s proposal to create a registry for immigrants, particularly those from Latin and Muslim-majority countries, isn’t about national security; it’s about racism and oppression. We already have extensive immigration tracking and vetting systems. Instead, these ideas are about branding entire populations as suspicious because of their faith or place of birth.” U.S. politician killed A suspect in the killing of one Minnesota politician and wounding of another is in custody, AP reports. After former Democratic House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark, were shot and killed in their house on Saturday, and Sen. John Hoffman, a Democrat, and his wife, Yvette, were wounded in theirs, a 57-year-old man named Vance Boelter was arrested and charged with two counts of murder and two of attempted murder.  Analysis: What elevates the risk of political violence? In the U.S., three factors “stand out: easy access to deadly weapons, intense polarization that paints political opponents as treasonous enemies rather than disagreeing compatriots, and incitements to political violence from high-profile public figures,” writes researcher Brian Klass. “The United States has repeatedly refused to do anything about easy access to deadly weapons, despite having, by far, the highest rate of mass killings among developed democracies. As a result, the only feasible levers are reducing polarization and stopping high-profile incitements to commit violence. Instead, during the Trump era, polarization has sharply increased. And over the past decade, Trump himself has been the most dangerous political actor in terms of routinely inciting violence against his opponents, including against specific politicians who could become assassination targets.” Read on, here. Additional reading:  “SUV drives through protesters in Culpeper, Va., police say,” the Washington Post reported Sunday;  “Protester shot and killed at ‘No Kings’ rally in Utah, police say,” AP reported Sunday. Commentary: “Is gun violence depressing military recruiting?” asks Jacob Ware, an adjunct professor at Georgetown University. “Perhaps the problem is not that young people are insufficiently patriotic, but that they have been fighting a war, daily, for their entire lives.”  ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Weapons, wariness, and war: Paris Air Show opens amid uncertainty

 

at 6/14/25 6:00am

As Europe rushes to rearm its military and President Trump moves away from NATO, this year’s Paris Air Show will open on a world stage that looks more uncertain than ever. U.S. defense-industry executives flying to the biennial show, which runs from June 16 to 22, aim to capitalize on higher European defense budgets, pledges for which are expected at the following week’s NATO Summit. But the Trump administrations anti-NATO turn—and a new push from Europe to bolster its own defense industrial base—could dampen U.S. export deals. Europe is “very focused on using some of that defense spending to grow their industrial base so they can buy from themselves, build themselves, and not be so reliant on the United States,” said Eric Fanning, CEO of the Aerospace Industries Association, which convenes industry and government officials at overseas trade shows.  American companies see opportunity—and risk—with European defense budgets and budgets at home, Fanning said.  “Theres more underlying to this air show than any one I’ve been to before,” he said. But despite the European push toward independence, experts say it will take years before the continent’s industrial base can stand on its own—and if countries want to stock  their arsenals now, they’ll need to buy American.  The major reason to do so is the war raging just 1,300 miles away from Paris.  Russia may even escalate its war on Ukraine during the show; Moscow has promised to retaliate for Ukraine’s “Spider Web” operation, which demolished scores of Russian planes with cheap drones. That operation could drive conversations about how Western nations can quickly field new and innovative technology instead of relying on large, expensive programs.  Beyond Europe’s plans to rearm Ukraine, expect updates on how companies are navigating a murky tariff situation, NATO’s plans for its own space sector, and how militaries are progressing on next-gen technology development. Now that the U.S. Air Force is blazing ahead with its sixth-gen fighter jet, the F-47, there could be a renewed push from Europe to make progress on its two next-gen fighter programs: the UK-Italian-Japanese GCAP and the German-Franco-Spanish FCAS. Those programs will likely be delayed and fielded much later than the F-47, due to disagreements between the multiple companies and funding concerns. “Some have argued that two competing European initiatives are unrealistic based on the necessary funding and development effort required to field a new advanced fighter. Anticipate this idea to play out in Paris as the industrial participants and partnered nations position themselves in the sixth-gen fighter race,” said Jon Hemler, an analyst with Forecast International, a Defense One sister brand.  Europe also plans to make or acquire drones to fly alongside its fighter jets, similar to the U.S. Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft program. Paris will see the international debut of full-scale versions of CCAs by General Atomics and Anduril, which both hope to eventually sell the drones abroad.  Over 300,000 visitors are expected to attend the show at Le Bourget, but there won’t be much of a Pentagon presence. Who is expected to be there? Michael Duffey, the newly sworn-in Pentagon acquisition chief. A few Air Force officials are also expected, including Kelli Seybolt, the head of Air Force international affairs, and Brig. Gen. Jason Voorheis, the head of fighters and advanced aircraft. But Air Force Secretary Troy Meink and Air Force Chief Gen. David Allvin won’t attend.  Congress, however, will be in full force—hoping to show diplomacy amid the Trump administration’s threats to NATO. The largest-ever delegation is heading to Paris, with Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan, and Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-NH., leading over two dozen lawmakers. A few defense hawks are slated to attend, including SASC chairman Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and HASC chairman Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala. The U.S. will bring a slew of aircraft to the air show, including F-35, F-15E, and F-16 fighter jets; C-17 and C-130J cargo planes; the KC-46 tanker; and the MQ-9 drone. They will be joined on the tarmac, in the air, and in exhibit halls by delegations from around the globe. China will have a large presence: Chinese commercial and military companies are listed as exhibitors, including the China National Aero-Technology Import & Export Corporation, which builds fighters, trainers, and bombers, and Cobtec Ltd, which builds unmanned aerial vehicles. Israeli firms on the air show’s exhibitors list include Israel Aerospace Industries, Rafael, and Elbit Systems. Much drama surrounding the country’s participation in last year’s Eurosatory defense conference: the French government originally banned Israel from the show, citing its military actions in Gaza, but a Paris court later reversed that decision. It remains to be seen how the country’s bombing campaign in Iran will be seen. ]]

[Category: Business]

— Four scenarios for the Middle East, from a former IDF intel chief

 

at 6/13/25 2:55pm

PRAGUE, Czech Republic — Hours after Israel began striking Iranian military leaders and nuclear sites, a former chief of Israeli military intelligence outlined four scenarios. How they might unfold depends on the responses of the United States, China, Russia and Iran, Amos Yadlin said on Friday at the GLOBSEC security forum here. All of them, however, assume continued Israeli military action. “It is not over yet. I think as we speak, airplanes are still flying into Iran to complete some of the job,” said Yadlin, who is currently an unofficial adviser to the Israeli government. The former Israeli Air Force general praised the operation, describing it as a “unique” challenge given the secretive and dispersed nature of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, which includes “all kinds of enrichment sites, all kind of other nuclear sites all over the country.”  The strikes were “very good on nuclear, he said, but “nuclear is not enough,” and Israel must continue to strike other Iranian military assets, especially its 3,000 or so missiles.  Iran, meanwhile, has vowed to retaliate. Four scenarios Yadlin outlined four scenarios. The first, he said, is a bilateral war between Israel and Iran, with the United States staying largely out. In describing the strikes on Friday morning, Secretary of State and acting national security advisor Marco Rubio carefully characterized them as a "unilateral" decision by Israel.  President Donald Trump had also publicly opposed an attack, yet Israeli leaders interpreted Trump’s stance as tacit approval—or at least non-interference, Yadlin said.  “I guess this was the case last night when Bibi called Trump, I think one hour before the attack,” he said. [[Related Posts]] Despite Trump’s public statements, he said, Israeli leaders believed Trump’s true message as: “You are threatened by a country that wants to destroy you. If you want to attack, attack. But we are not in the business... We are afraid that our soldiers in Qatar, in Bahrain will be attacked by Iran. So go for it. Good luck.” As second scenario would see U.S. forces joining Israel to attack Iran, possibly triggered if Iranian retaliation affects the United States—say, by direct attack or by blocking oil traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. One former U.S. Central Command official said the United States is unlikely to use its military assets to help Israel bomb Iranian sites, but that U.S. planners are preparing for contingencies.  “I know this is a specific concern: Say that an Israeli jet is shot down and an IDF pilot evacuates and lands somewhere in Saudi Arabia or something—is the U.S. military going to go and help rescue them? And then, in the fog of war, something happens?” the former official said. Stimson Center CEO Brian Finlay agreed that the United States would likely try to limit its involvement but said the risks were rising. “President Trump was very clear in the days leading up to these strikes that he did not want to see these strikes, that they are in a period of intense negotiations with Tehran. And so I think we are entering into what is clearly a much less stable place—not just with Iran, but I think, from Washington’s perspective, with America’s allies in the region as well,” Finlay said at GLOBSEC. The third scenario would see the United States advance a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for an immediate ceasefire, making it diplomatically costly for Iran to retaliate.  “The Russians and the Chinese will be smart enough not to veto it,” Yadlin said, which would give Trump “much better cards” to negotiate with Iran. In Yadlin’s final scenario, Russia and China—both allies of Iran—decide to back Tehran against Israel and possibly the United States, setting the conditions for a global conflict. He described that outcome as “unlikely.” James Stokes, who directs of nuclear policy at NATO, told a GLOBSEC audience, said, “We are continuing to watch the situation overall in the Middle East, the ongoing conflicts that are happening there, and we’ll continue to.” “Opportunity”  In justifying the attack, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said publicly that Iran was capable of building a nuclear weapon. U.S. officials have long warned that Iran could build a Bomb within weeks of deciding to do so.  A March report from the International Atomic Energy Agency noted: “Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched up to 60% U-235 has increased to 275 kg, up from 182 kg in the past quarter. Iran is the only non-nuclear weapon State enriching to this level.”  "Uranium enriched at 60% purity is just a short, technical step away from weapons-grade levels of 90%,” AP wrote last year. One official at an international organization that monitors nuclear testing said the group had not detected any indication that Iran had tested such a weapon. Yadlin, a frequent critic of Netanyahu, said on Friday that Hamas’s October 2023, attack on Israel represented not only a brutal act of terrorism but also “a huge failure—intelligence failure, operational failure, leadership failure, political failure” by Israel’s leaders. He was, however, supportive of the strikes on Iranian targets. He said the main impetus for the timing of Israel’s attack was the “opportunity” presented by the weakened state of Hamas, Hezbollah and the Assad regime in Syria—all close allies of Iran. “There was an opportunity, and it was maybe the last time.” ]]

[Category: Threats]

— Is gun violence depressing military recruiting?

 

at 6/13/25 11:06am

The U.S. Army will celebrate its 250th birthday on Saturday, June 14, 2025, with a parade in Washington, D.C., in which about 6,600 soldiers and heavy pieces of military equipment will roll through the streets. The parade aims to display the Army’s history and power. “It’s going to be incredible,” President Donald Trump recently said. Trump’s 79th birthday also occurs on June 14. Despite the festivities, however, the parade will occur amid bleak times for the U.S. military, as it experiences a multiyear decline in recruitment numbers. In the face of a pandemic and a strong civilian job market, the Army, Air Force and Navy all missed their recruitment goals in 2022 and 2023. In 2022, the Army missed its quota by 25%.  In 2024, the U.S. military met its recruitment target, which supports the argument that the bump is not due to Trump, as recruitment levels began to rise again before his reelection. But in some cases, the U.S. military has met its recruitment goals by lowering target numbers. And as a scholar of terrorism and targeted violence, I believe a close reading of available data on military recruitment suggests U.S. gun violence may be largely to blame for the lack of interest in joining the military. Regardless of one’s personal politics, the data on U.S. gun violence makes for painful reading. Almost 47,000 Americans died from gun-related injuries in 2023. In 2022, there were 51 school shootings in which students were injured or killed by guns. And gun injuries are the leading cause of death for Americans between ages 1 and 19. Data about the perceptions of gun violence is equally staggering, especially among American youth between ages 14 and 30. Four out of five American youth believe gun violence to be a problem, and 25% have endured real active-shooter lockdowns, according to data compiled by Everytown for Gun Safety, where I serve as a survivor fellow, the Southern Poverty Law Center and American University’s Polarization and Extremism Research and Innovation Lab. Moreover, these perceptions have considerable impacts on youth mental health and their sense of safety. Studies have linked concern over school shootings among adolescents with higher rates of anxiety and trauma-related disorders. As Arne Duncan, who served as President Barack Obama’s secretary of education during the Sandy Hook tragedy, said in 2023: “Unfortunately, what’s now binding young people across the country together is not joy of music, or sports, or whatever, it’s really the shared pain of gun violence – and it cuts through race and class and geography and economics.” In the past couple of years, polls taken of Generation Z youth, born between 1997 and 2012, suggest mental health and mass shootings are among the most important political issues motivating this band of voters. Gun violence, in other words, is a national security emergency, undermining the U.S. government’s ability to protect its citizens in their schools, places of worship and communities.  As former Marine Gen. John Allen wrote in 2019: “Americans today are more likely to experience gun violence at home than they might in many of the places to which I deployed in the name of defending our nation.” Accordingly, gun violence has undercut American patriotism, corroding the U.S. government’s soft power within its own borders. Generation Z, termed by some as the “lockdown generation,” is often derided as less patriotic than its predecessors.  Also, the belief in American exceptionalism is dropping among millennials, born between 1981 and 1996. That perception is combined with less confidence in U.S. global engagement and the efficacy of military solutions. American culture has long inspired military service, with recruits seduced by action movies and promises of heroic returns to the U.S. But American culture today is being rewired into one of suffering, pain and victimhood.  Gun violence destroys youth tolerance for the violence that defines a career in the U.S. military.  Internal U.S. military surveys of young Americans show that “the top three reasons young people cite for rejecting military enlistment are the same across all the services: fear of death, worries about post-traumatic stress disorder and leaving friends and family — in that order.” Generations already suffering a shattered sense of safety and place do not see the military as a viable option.  The explanations the U.S. Defense Department gives for dismal recruitment levels focus on the younger generation’s supposed lack of backbone or hatred of America. Republicans, including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, have blamed alleged “wokeness” for low recruitment levels. And the Trump administration’s statements about improving recruitment numbers over the past several months overlook both a late Biden-era surge after a pandemic slump as well as the reality that numbers remain depressed due to military services repeatedly lowering their recruitment goals.  Very rarely are introspective questions publicly debated today about the objective attractiveness of military service or the appetite for violence among young people. The problem, I believe, is not that young people are insufficiently patriotic – it’s that they have already been fighting a war, daily, for their entire lives.  In reversing the slide in recruitment, then, the military could improve its sensitivity to these important concerns.  Highlighting the range of careers within the services that do not involve front-line combat and physical danger could encourage more reluctant would-be recruits to volunteer.  Mental health support also could be made an essential element of military training and lifestyle − not a resource only for those bearing the hidden side-effects of life in the ranks. Encouraging those suffering from treatable mental health issues to seek meaning in service could also boost recruitment numbers. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. ]]

[Category: Ideas]

— The D Brief: Israel bombs Iran; Courts debate Guard deployment; Navy merges drone efforts; SecDef pressed on firings; And a bit more.

 

at 6/13/25 9:06am

More than 200 Israeli jets conducted a series of deadly airstrikes overnight against numerous targets inside Iran, including the country’s top military and paramilitary leaders as well as uranium enrichment sites in Natanz, “which has operated for years to achieve nuclear weapons capability and houses the infrastructure required for enriching uranium to military-grade levels,” the Israeli military announced on social media Friday. Iranian air defenses were sabotaged by Mossad agents who had smuggled drones and other explosives into Iran, then used them to take out missile systems and other sites as the strikes began, Israel officials told Nextgov’s David DiMolfetta in Jerusalem. A bit more on that, here. Notable: Iran’s underground uranium enrichment center at Fordow and its Isfahan nuclear fuel site seem to have been unaffected so far, Rafael Grossi of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Friday. Reuters reports at least 20 senior commanders were killed in the strikes, which Israel describes as pre-emptive. The New York Times has a bit more on some top officials believed to have perished in the attacks. Two U.S. Navy ships are racing to the region with additional missile-defense capability, Politico reports. Why now? “Recent intelligence shows Iran is nearing the point of no return in its race toward a nuclear weapon,” the Israeli military says—U.S. intelligence agencies reportedly disagreed—and Israel insists Iran “is producing thousands of kilograms of enriched uranium, alongside decentralized and fortified enrichment compounds, in underground, fortified sites. This program has accelerated significantly in recent months, bringing the regime significantly closer to obtaining a nuclear weapon.” Rewind: Reports an Israeli attack was imminent surfaced just days ago, prompting U.S. officials to authorize its military families to depart the region, as we highlighted in Thursday’s newsletter. Stars and Stripes has a bit more. AP headline: “Israel’s attack on Iran was years in the making.” More after the jump... 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 and Lauren C. Williams. Share your tips and feedback here. And if you’re not already subscribed, you can do that here. On this day in 1997, a jury sentenced Timothy McVeigh to death for his part in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. Israel calls its Friday morning strikes “the first stage” of its latest overt efforts to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. “Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of the Iranian regime are an existential threat to the State of Israel and to the wider world. The State of Israel has no choice but to fulfill the obligation to act in defense of its citizens and will continue to do so everywhere it is required to do so, as we have done in the past,” the Israeli Defense Forces said in a statement.  One forecast: Israel has prepared two weeks of operations against Iran, the Wall Street Journal reports.  White House reaction: “Two months ago I gave Iran a 60 day ultimatum to ‘make a deal,’” President Trump said on social media Friday. “They should have done it! Today is day 61. I told them what to do, but they just couldn’t get there. Now they have, perhaps, a second chance!” Expert reax: “The breadth and scale of these strikes—against senior Iranian officials and other military facilities in addition to nuclear sites—suggest this operation is intended to not just dissuade Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons, but also cripple any potential military response and even to destabilise the regime,” said Matthew Savill of the London-based Royal United Services Institute. “Details are still emerging but the reported targeting of the commander of the IRGC, the head of the conventional military, and advisers to Iran’s Supreme Leader, are all beyond that necessary for a purely ‘pre-emptive’ strike on the nuclear programme.” On the durability of this campaign: “The size of the force allegedly assembled for this series of attacks represents the overwhelming bulk of their longer-range strike aircraft,” Savill said, and added, “They have the ability to conduct multiple such rounds of strikes, but operating for an extended duration over this considerable range will stretch even the Israeli Air Force.” Capitol Hill reax: “Iran’s sprint to become a nuclear threat to America and our allies, while leading the world in proliferating terrorism, is the cause of this conflict,” said Mississippi GOP Sen. Roger Wicker, chairman of the Armed Services Committee. “The single worst decision Iran could make now is to target American service members. I’m confident [Central Command] General Kurilla and [Defense] Secretary Hegseth have prepared our forces in the region for the threat environment they face,” Wicker said.  Wicker’s Democratic colleague Jack Reed of Rhode Island called Israel’s attack “a reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence…While tensions between Israel and Iran are real and complex, military aggression of this scale is never the answer.” “I urge both nations to show immediate restraint, and I call on President Trump and our international partners to press for diplomatic de-escalation before this crisis spirals further out of control,” Reed said.  Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Netanyahu wasn’t trying to help diplomacy; he was trying to destroy diplomacy,” said Connecticut Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of the Foreign Relations Committee. “How do we know? They reportedly targeted and killed Iran’s chief negotiator with Trump,” he wrote on social media Friday.  “Game on. Pray for Israel,” wrote GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham, also of the Foreign Relations Committee.  Additional reading:  “Israel’s attack raises potential for all-out war,” the Associated Press reports;  “Israels strike on Iran was 8 months in the making,” Axios reports; “Striking the Heart of the Iranian Regime, Netanyahu Looks to His Legacy,” the New York Times reports; “MAGA Warned Trump on Iran. Now He’s In An Impossible Position,” Rachel Bade of Politico writes; And don’t miss a brand-new think-tank report, “Nuclear Cooperation Among the ‘Axis of Aggressors’: An Emerging Threat,” which reviews the challenges presented by the combined efforts of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, via the Foundation for Defense of Democracies in Washington.  Troops in California Thursday’s judicial whiplash: Hours after one judge ruled that the Trump administration had illegally federalized National Guard troops for deployment to Los Angeles, a higher court put the stay on hold. CNN: “Senior US District Judge Charles Breyer had ruled that Trump unlawfully federalized thousands of members of California’s National Guard and must return control of the troops to the state by mid-day Friday. But the order from the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals puts that on pause.” More, here. Around the Defense Department How drone warfare fares in the 2026 budget proposal. The Pentagon wants to spend more than 20 percent more next year to research, develop, test and evaluate new technologies—but that increase would come from the Trump administration’s massive tax and budget reconciliation bill, leaving funding levels flat if Congress doesn’t pass it. And a lot of drone spending will likely hinge on that one-time funding, Defense One’s Lauren C. Williams reported Thursday.  Navy combines large drone-boat efforts. Its large and medium unmanned surface vehicle programs will become a “single program for autonomous surface craft,” the Government Accountability Office wrote in its annual report auditing the Pentagon’s major weapons. The streamlined program, which Navy officials hinted at earlier this year, is expected to start development by 2027 under “the major capability acquisition pathway,” officials told GAO. The Navy will also take over DARPA’s USX-1 Defiant, Adm. James Kilby, the acting chief of naval operations, told lawmakers in written testimony this week. DARPA finished building the 180-foot ship in February and is now performing commissioning trials. “Defiant will be the Navy’s first Medium Unmanned Surface Vessel (MUSV) that is designed from the ground up as an unmanned ship and will operate in a fully unmanned fashion,” Kilby wrote. Hegseth grilled on CNO, other firings. It’s been nearly four months since Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth fired the chief of naval operations and several other military officials, and only one position—the chairman of the Joint Chiefs—has been replaced with a Senate-confirmed officer. Thursday, several lawmakers asked Hegseth why it’s taking so long, and why they were fired in the first place. “In due time and for all the right reasons,” Hegseth said when asked specifically about the CNO role during a House Armed Services Committee hearing.  It was the first time in a public setting that the defense secretary has taken questions on the decisions to not only fire the Joint Chiefs chairman, the CNO, the vice chief of staff of the Air Force, and the top lawyers of all three military departments, but also the dual-hatted head of U.S. Cyber Command and the National Security Agency in April. Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., on Gen. Timothy Haugh, the former CYBERCOM commander and NSA chief: “Having Gen. Haugh fired—we groomed him for over a decade to fill those shoes, and I dont know that anybody can fill those shoes right now. Its going to take a year or two for people to get there,” Bacon said. “I really believe that the most happy people on the firing of Gen. Haugh [were] Russia and China.” No one has been nominated to take his place. But when asked when an announcement was coming, Hegseth told Rep. Sarah Elfreth, D-Md., “It will not be that long.” Defense One’s Meghann Myers has a bit more, here. Additional reading: “National Guard activates first-of-its-kind electromagnetic warfare company,” Task & Purpose reported Tuesday.  ]]

[Category: Threats]

As of 6/21/25 1:21am. Last new 6/20/25 4:42pm.