Defense One - All Content

NATO snubs Boeing, picks Saab to build alliance’s next radar plane

Thomas Novelly — Tue, 07 Jul 2026 21:21:42 -0400

NATO allies plan to buy 10 of Saab’s GlobalEye aircraft as the alliance’s next-generation radar plane, snubbing Boeing and its E-7 Wedgetail offering, officials announced on Tuesday.

The alliance would replace its Boeing E-3 Airborne Warning and Control aircraft with the Swedish company’s offering, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said during the alliance’s Defence Industry Forum in Ankara, Turkey.

“For decades, NATO has relied on a fleet of E3 Airborne Warning and Control Systems, that have been our ‘eyes in the skies’. They have been deployed from Northern Norway to Southern Türkiye. They have served us well and continue to do so, but they are reaching the end of their lives,” Rutte said. “Today, several Allies are announcing the joint procurement of up to 10 SAAB GlobalEye aircraft to replace them.”

Saab CEO Micael Johansson told reporters at the summit that he estimated the deal would be valued around $4.5 billion and that deliveries could begin in 2030, depending on when the deal is signed.

Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, and Sweden are joining together to procure Saab’s aircraft, NATO said in a press release.

Their choice was influenced by the Pentagon’s decision—later reversed—to request no money for E-7s in the 2027 budget, one analyst said..

“When the U.S. ‘27 budget came out, and there was no money for E-7, and NATO looked at that and said, ‘Well, if the U.S. isn't buying it, why should we?,’ and they made an announcement right then that because the administration was not behind E-7 they did not expect to be favoring

it.” said J.J. Gertler, an aerospace analyst for the Teal Group. “That was both a matter of timing when the administration decided actually to buy E-7 later, but also something of an own goal.”

That “leaning toward Saab” announcement was reported in April, just days after the Pentagon’s budget rollout showed no plans to fund the E-7 Wedgetail, by La Lettre, a French publication.

Boeing defended the E-7 aircraft in the wake of NATO’s formal announcement.

“Boeing remains fully committed to supporting the mission needs of NATO allies and partners. With an active production line, the E-7A is the most capable and mature airborne battle management, command and control system fielded today,” a spokesperson said in an emailed statement. “The E-7 is a combat-proven platform already in the hands of NATO allies, delivering a family of systems approach, driven by unmatched interoperability with allied capabilities, and an industrial and sustainment framework ready to meet operational timelines.”

Saab said in a press release that the company has “not signed a contract or received an order related to the announcement.”

The GlobalEye uses a collection of sensors mounted on a Bombardier Global 6500 aircraft to detect a wide-range of threats in contested combat zones, including drones, ballistic and hypersonic missiles, according to the company’s website.

“We are confident that GlobalEye is the right choice for the Alliance, delivering proven capability, adaptability and long-term operational advantage. Today’s announcement clearly positions GlobalEye as the world-leading solution for advanced airborne early warning and control. We look forward to the next steps in the negotiations,” Johansson said in a statement.

In May, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reversed course and said the initial decision to omit E-7 funding reflected an outdated “austerity” and “divest-to-invest mindset.”

Last month, House appropriators backed the White House’s $1.5-billion budget amendment to fund E-7 Wedgetail development and pushed back on an attempt to raid the Navy’s airborne early warning account in the process.

NATO delivered its own Wedgetail whiplash last fall. In 2023, the alliance announced plans to buy six E-7s. Then, in July 2025, the Trump administration withdrew from the deal. Four months later, the Netherlands and other countries declared they would no longer seek to buy the aircraft, citing “strategic and financial” woes.

]]>

House committee wants details on DHS network hack

David DiMolfetta — Tue, 07 Jul 2026 17:53:00 -0400

House Homeland Security Committee staff are requesting a briefing from the Department of Homeland Security on the breach of the agency’s Homeland Security Information Network, according to a committee aide with knowledge of the matter.

Staffers are hoping to be briefed on the intrusion—first reported by Nextgov/FCW last week—by Friday, said the aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the matter is sensitive.

Hackers are believed to have penetrated HSIN sometime between late May and early June, though their affiliation and whether any contents were pilfered from the platform is unclear, a person familiar with the matter previously said.

Approved users lean on the network to securely access data, exchange requests with partner agencies, manage operations, coordinate safety and security for planned events, respond to incidents and share mission-critical information needed to protect their communities, according to its website. HSIN carries unclassified but sensitive information shared among federal, state, local, territorial, tribal, international and private-sector partners.

The intrusion comes as the U.S. oversees security for World Cup games across the country, placing added scrutiny on the systems federal, state and local officials use to coordinate major events. A breach of the platform may raise concerns about whether hackers gained insight into security planning, interagency coordination or response procedures surrounding one of the most visible international events hosted predominately in the United States.

Senate Intelligence Committee Vice Chairman Mark Warner, D-Va., said last week that the network is being used to support the World Cup and America250 events. He added that it played a key role for emergency responders during last year’s mid-air collision between an American Airlines flight and an Army Black Hawk helicopter outside Washington, D.C.

“The information in HSIN, while not classified, is highly sensitive, and its exposure risks national security,” Warner said. “DHS and DOJ must thoroughly investigate who breached HSIN, what the attackers accessed, and ensure all DHS partners are provided with timely information and the tools necessary to mitigate any associated risks from the breach.”

When asked by Nextgov/FCW about the committee briefing request, a department spokesperson sent the same statement it provided last week that confirmed the hack.

The statement said staff “immediately took action to isolate the affected systems, mitigate the vulnerability, and launch a comprehensive forensic investigation,” and added that an investigation is ongoing and more details can’t be provided.

]]>

Iran War supplemental deepens FY27 budget uncertainty

Shaun McDougall — Sun, 05 Jul 2026 21:27:12 -0400

A recent $87.6 billion supplemental funding request from the White House to pay for the Iran war and other expenses complicates an already tense budget process in Washington. The supplemental follows the release of a record $1.5 trillion defense budget request in April, putting additional pressure on Congress to sort out what has become a complex three-part defense budget comprising a $1.1 trillion base budget request, a $350 billion reconciliation request, and the new supplemental request.

Most of the new supplemental funding, $67.1 billion, or 77% of the total, would go to the Pentagon. Other investments outside of the Pentagon include $11 billion for the Department of Agriculture, $3.4 billion for the Department of State, and $2 billion for the Department of Homeland Security, among others.

Within the defense portion of the supplemental, most of the funding is allocated toward direct costs of the war in Iran. The single biggest item in the entire supplemental is $21 billion for munitions, which would help rebuild stockpiles after thousands of offensive and defensive missiles and bombs were expended during the opening months of the war. The rapidly growing demand for munitions was already highlighted in the FY27 defense budget request, which sought $76.3 billion for munitions, up 185%over the $26.8 billion allocated in FY26. Combined with the supplemental, the administration has now asked for $97.3 billion for munitions across multiple military services this year. For context, that figure is more than three times the size of the Army's entire FY26 procurement budget of $30.5 billion.

The next largest item requested by the White House is $17.3 billion for operational costs of the war. The initial campaign against Iran included a wide array of aircraft, ships, and ground assets that require fuel, maintenance, and repairs. The subsequent naval blockade sustained many of these logistics expenses, which were exacerbated as fuel costs rose due to Iran closing the Strait of Hormuz. In May, military leaders warned that they would have to begin curtailing some regular training exercises and operations this summer if Congress didn't backfill the operations budget with supplemental funding.

Infographic by Jorge Morejon

The White House is also asking Congress for an additional $2.4 billion for drones, which could be used to replace one-way attack and interceptor drones used during the war, as well as at least two dozen MQ-9A Reapers lost in combat. The Air Force faces a problem with the Reaper, however. The MQ-9A is no longer in production, leaving the service with a capability gap. The Air Force could try to accelerate a follow-on capability, but that could take longer than desired to meet immediate replenishment needs. Alternatively, the service could procure the larger MQ-9B, which features a 79-foot wingspan compared to the 66-foot wingspan of the older MQ-9A. It's also possible that some of this funding could be used for other emerging drone programs.

The fragile state of the conflict also raises questions about ongoing war costs. A fragile ceasefire has been interrupted by sporadic skirmishes, and the recent Memorandum of Understanding intended to help end the war lacks substance and relies on further negotiations that have already faced several roadblocks. For the time being, the cost of the Iran war will continue to escalate slowly upwards if the status quo remains unchanged, but the shortfalls and need for additional resources could spike if all-out hostilities resume. A true lasting peace agreement would avoid additional war costs down the road, but that outlook is far from certain.

Beyond the War

The defense supplemental is more than just an Iran war request. While most of the defense portion of the request does support items like operational costs and equipment replenishment related to the war, it also includes other priorities that aren't directly related to the conflict. For example, the White House wants $4 billion for Airborne Moving Target Indication (AMTI) and the Space Data Network (SDN) Backbone, which are related to the president's Golden Dome homeland air and missile defense effort.

The Space Force is pursuing a space-based AMTI capability that would allow satellites to track airborne threats. This program would complement the Air Force's future E-7 Wedgetail fleet, which is replacing the legacy E-3 AWACS. The service requested $7.1 billion in FY27 to begin procurement of a space-based AMTI system, but all the funding was allocated in the reconciliation portion of the request. The Air Force did lose one of its E-3 AWACS to an Iranian strike at an airbase in Saudi Arabia, but this AMTI funding is more of a long-term follow-on than a direct replacement for a particular E-3 aircraft.

Meanwhile, the Space Data Network Backbone represents part of the communications layer of the planned Golden Dome architecture. The SDN, formerly known as MILNET, is being pursued in place of Transport Layer Tranche 3 satellites, which would have been competed among several contractors. SpaceX is working on both of these programs, and in May the company was awarded a $2.3 billion SDN contract and a $4.2 billion AMTI contract. The Space Force requested around $3 billion for the SDN through the FY27 reconciliation request. Other vendors will continue working on earlier Transport Layer tranches, which will be integrated with SDN. Officials have also said that additional AMTI awards to multiple vendors are planned later in the year.

The supplemental also sets aside $12.1 billion for classified programs. The original FY27 request included $98.7 billion in classified funding, split between $61.5 billion for research and $37.2 billion for procurement, according to Forecast International's U.S. Defense Budget Forecast database. If approved by Congress, the supplemental would increase the classified topline by more than 12%, which is a sizeable change. Naturally, we're unable to determine how much, if any, of that classified funding is directly related to the war.

The administration also wants $5.1 billion to support cybersecurity and autonomy, which appears to be a request for emerging tech rather than direct war costs, but the supplemental lacks transparency and doesn't allocate funding to individual line items in the budget.

A Complicated Budget Outlook

Even before considering the new supplemental, the administration's approach to mixing base and reconciliation funding in its FY27 request creates risk and uncertainty for the Pentagon. The defense budget process involves four defense committees (the House and Senate Armed Services Committees and the House and Senate Appropriations Committees) releasing markups of the budget request that contain line-item adjustments that add or remove funding at the program level. So far, three defense committees have released markups of the FY27 defense budget, and none of them have addressed the $350 billion reconciliation portion of the request. That funding will have to be considered during a separate process, but some GOP lawmakers have expressed doubt about passage of another reconciliation bill.

Adding the supplemental bill to the mix further complicates an already fraught legislative landscape. The supplemental has faced resistance in Congress. Democrats largely oppose the bill, arguing it pays for a war that Congress did not authorize. This position is bolstered by passage of resolutions against the war in both chambers. While mostly symbolic, the resolutions underscore the difficulty of getting a controversial war spending bill through both chambers. Rep. Mark Harris, R-NC, suggested Republicans may have to use the reconciliation process to pass a war supplemental in the face of Democratic opposition, but that approach won't necessarily guarantee success.

The Pentagon would still be left with a $1 trillion budget even without the $350 billion reconciliation package and the new supplemental, but it would still face challenges. The most immediate impact would be the reduced training and operations this summer. New efforts to dramatically scale up munitions procurement, which are heavily reliant on supplemental funds, would also be significantly curtailed. Other key initiatives, such as Golden Dome and new investments in autonomous systems, would similarly be affected. These programs would have to be slowed or reduced in scope in the near-term in the absence of reconciliation or supplemental funding.

Several legacy programs would also be negatively impacted due to how the administration structured its request. For example, 53 out of 85 F-35 fighters requested in FY27 were allocated to the reconciliation portion of the budget, while nearly one-third of the Navy's KC-130J request is tied to the reconciliation package.

The administration has set high expectations for its FY27 budget request and its new supplemental proposal, but the complex realities of the budget process could result in a final spending plan that looks very different from the original request.

]]>

These light-weight power cells run on nuclear waste and could power next-gen drones

Lauren C. Williams — Fri, 03 Jul 2026 08:00:00 -0400

How many missions could a drone or satellite fly with a battery pack that can last decades? And what if that battery could be fueled by nuclear waste?

That’s the future scientists are working toward in DARPA’s “Rads to Watts” program, which aims to create lightweight batteries with a high energy density. And a recent $3.37 million contract award aims to fund a viable proof-of-concept device that can produce more than 10 watts per kilogram with a yearslong shelf life.

“Solar cells directly convert sunlight into electricity…Ours directly convert radiation into electricity,” said Stafford Sheehan, CEO and founder of Project Omega, which describes their radioisotope power sources as mini-generators that replace traditional batteries.

“We already have some of these small devices running; the ones that are specifically designed to meet the DARPA figure of merit are going to come out early next year.”

Several organizations are participating in the program, with Morgan State University serving as the prime contractor and handling basic research and the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory handling nuclear materials and testing. Northrop Grumman and ARA will bring computational modeling to make sure the prototype meets performance standards.

Project Omega will build the nuclear power generator based on a radioisotope found in nuclear waste, and Widetronix is designing the semiconductor power converter. The goal is to produce a working prototype by early 2027 at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

The power cells could be used in “any application where a battery dying is a pain point,” Sheehan said. “One example is on satellites: if you lose power on a satellite, you lose the satellite, it's gone…if your batteries die and you don't have any sort of backup power.”

These power sources use isotopes separated from nuclear waste and convert radiation directly into electricity.

“At a high level, we take nuclear waste, we recycle it into two products: one is fuel for reactors…the other are power isotopes, so isotopes you can use to power things,” Sheehan said.

Radioisotope power sources have been used in everything from smoke detectors to space systems. But Project Omega hopes to do it on a larger scale.

“There are over 100,000 metric tons of nuclear waste sitting in the 52 reactor sites around the country; so there's plenty of nuclear waste currently. The federal government gets sued for billions of dollars every year just because they haven't dealt with the nuclear waste,” Sheehan said. “It's very valuable to have a battery that lasts.”

Omega’s power cells consist of a solid state, or “chunk,” of isotope that will be layered with the semiconductor to generate power. They also work in extreme temperatures—something that would benefit military operations using unmanned systems in harsh environments.

“We have been using these radioisotope power systems in space for decades,” Sheehan said. “We're just taking the systems that we use for space and we're using a different isotope,” Strontinum-90, which is less hazardous than the Plutonium-238 isotopes used in similar systems.

The award comes as the Pentagon grapples with increased demand and use of drone systems

that have to be charged and the persistent need for more power generation on the battlefield.

“Over the next 18 months, the program will focus on reducing technical risk, testing system performance under realistic conditions, and generating the data needed to inform future development and transition pathways,” a PNNL official wrote in a statement to Defense One. “Key challenges include improving energy conversion efficiency, validating long-term reliability, managing radiation effects, and ensuring safe, secure handling and deployment.”

]]>

Does Space Force have enough lawyers for tomorrow’s wars? Senators want to know

Thomas Novelly — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 12:45:28 -0400

As Space Force leaders push for more orbital warfighting capabilities and even potential moon operations, senators want to make sure they have enough space-focused military lawyers for future conflicts.

The Defense Department would be required to assess its “space law requirements” to face rising threats and examine “options for establishing a dedicated legal organization within the Air Force, Space Force, or Space Command,” under the Senate Armed Service Committee’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act, released last month.

“The committee recognizes that operational demands in the space domain have grown, including reliance on commercial integration, allied and partner cooperation, and dual-use

technologies,” says the SASC’s NDAA report. “The committee is concerned that current legal, policy, and institutional structures within the Department of Defense may not have kept pace with the complexity of space operations.”

The newest military service branch is aiming to increase its budget, double its troop strength, and boost its role in operations such as those in Venezuela and the war in Iran. Advocates for the Space Force talk about extending its reach to the Moon’s orbit—and maybe even putting troops on the lunar surface.

Senators said that lawyers well-versed in outer space will be needed for those complex missions.

“The U.S. Space Force lacks its own legal corps, formalized training pipeline, or enduring mechanism to develop a specialized space law expertise,” the SASC reporting language reads. “The growing complexity of international space law, civil-military partnerships, commercial integration, dual-use technologies, and industrial base considerations require enhanced, domain-specific legal capacity.”

It’s time to reconvene the JAG-related discussions that fizzled out as the Space Force was being formed, said Aaron Brynildson, a University of Mississippi law professor and retired Air Force judge advocate general. Currently, the service shares uniformed lawyers with the Air Force. Now, he sees creating a space-specific JAG corps as essential for future operations.

“Space is going to be the most important domain in the next 20 years, and it's the one domain where I think U.S. dominance isn't guaranteed,” Brynildson said. “If you're going to grow the Space Force from 6,500 people to 20,000 in the next couple of decades, you need to treat it like a real branch, and part of that is having their own JAGs advise on domain-specific space warfare.”

In April, the Space Force identified legal maneuvering from China and Russia as a major concern for space operations.

“China and Russia have long used international and domestic legal frameworks and regulatory mechanisms to degrade their opponents’ capabilities, weaken opposing coalitions, and obtain international sympathy and support from third parties,” reads the ambitious “Future Operating Environment 2040” document, which examined growing space threats. “With international space law having remained essentially unchanged since the 1960s and 1970s, when the four foundational United Nations treaties were established, lawfare presents an asymmetric approach to restricting U.S. freedom of action in the space domain.”

The SASC NDAA calls for the chief of space operations, the Air Force secretary, the head of Space Command, and the Defense Legal Services Agency to examine “current and projected requirements for space law expertise” and to submit a report to the Senate and House Armed Services Committees by Dec. 1

Lawmakers want to know how many legal personnel currently support space operations, any gaps in legal readiness related to international space law, options for establishing a dedicated space legal organization, the requirements for advanced domain-specific legal education, and opportunities for academic and research partnerships relevant to “national security space operations.”

]]>

Trump says Pulte can declassify ‘whatever’ he wants, sparking fears of exposing intelligence secrets

David DiMolfetta — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 10:00:00 -0400

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that acting spy chief Bill Pulte can declassify “whatever” records he wants and can declassify “almost everything,” a sweeping green light that has alarmed former intelligence officials, who warn that careless releases could expose sensitive intelligence capabilities and sidestep standard review processes with other spy agencies.

Trump said Wednesday that acting Director of National Intelligence Bill Pulte would only serve in the job for “a month or two months or something,” but has his permission in the interim to release classified records.

“Bill is there just for a fairly short period of time,” Trump told reporters at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland. “But while he’s there, I said you can declassify whatever you want.”

Under U.S. law, records declassification is usually handled through a structured review process meant to identify national security risks before materials are released. Trump’s comments appear to give Pulte political backing to move aggressively, but they don’t necessarily address how agencies with involvement in any records would be consulted first.

“My guess is that NSA and CIA are losing their minds at the idea of Pulte declassifying a lot of stuff,” said a former official, who, like others for this story, spoke on the condition of anonymity to be candid and for fear of retribution.

“If Pulte actually runs the traps and considers damage and balances, he won’t declassify much. If he doesn’t care about blowing up cyber exploits, putting foreign relationships at risk, or getting people killed, he could declassify a lot,” the former official added.

Intelligence records are typically reviewed by the agency that produced them before release, particularly if disclosure could expose that agency’s operations, but that consultation might be skipped entirely under Pulte, a second former official said.

An ODNI spokesperson did not immediately return a request for comment.

Trump has placed Pulte at the center of a wider declassification push that began under former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, who used her role atop ODNI to release records tied to Trump-era grievances over alleged weaponization inside the intelligence community. ODNI’s own public releases under Gabbard included documents the office claimed exposed efforts by intelligence officials to undermine Trump’s 2016 victory and material it said showed a conspiracy used during his 2019 impeachment proceedings.

The declassification push is part of a broader campaign to challenge an intelligence community the president has long accused of working against him. Since the 2016 Russia investigation, Trump and his allies have argued that intelligence and law enforcement shops have used their powers to damage his presidency.

“Trump’s statement alone saying that Pulte has this authority is damaging to national security because any person thinking about volunteering or working with the United States might think twice now, and is more likely to go to the Brits or another service,” a third former official said, adding that if Pulte moves to declassify intelligence involving other agencies, he would be in violation of the law.

The president “just signaled to any person providing intelligence to the United States that their intelligence can be released at Pulte’s whim, thus putting their entire security and safety in jeopardy,” the third former official added.

The White House has assembled a task force collecting thousands of pages of intelligence and law enforcement documents, mostly related to the 2020 election, with plans to declassify some of them in ways that could support Trump’s claims about election irregularities and fraud, NBC News reported Tuesday.

Trump’s declassification plans land against a long-running backdrop of concerns over his administration’s handling of sensitive intelligence. During his first term, officials said he shared highly classified information provided by the Israelis with Russian officials in the Oval Office. Separately, Russian and U.S. news reports later identified Oleg Smolenkov, a former Russian government official living near Washington, as a possible CIA source who had disappeared from Russia in 2017 after allegedly providing information on Russian President Vladimir Putin’s role in the Kremlin’s 2016 election interference efforts.

Trump was later indicted in June 2023 over classified records kept at Mar-a-Lago, including documents prosecutors said involved highly sensitive national defense information, though the case was dismissed and later dropped after he returned to office. Former President Joe Biden also faced a classified documents investigation, but a special counsel declined to charge him on grounds that there was not enough evidence to convict him of “willfully” retaining the sensitive materials.

Pulte’s short tenure has already produced early staffing changes at ODNI that have removed around 50 career and political staff from their roles in the office. The moves follow a broader downsizing campaign started under Gabbard.

The personnel churn included the sidelining of Will Ruger, the deputy director of national intelligence for mission integration. Pulte also brought in a new chief of staff, Christina Norton, who served as Pulte’s chief of staff at the Federal Housing Finance Agency and as the RNC’s election integrity director, helping oversee its 2024 poll-watching operation. Her move into ODNI has sharpened concerns that the office could be drawn further into Trump’s push to revisit election-related claims.

Trump’s comments come after he slowed a Senate push last month to quickly confirm Jay Clayton as permanent intelligence chief, allowing Pulte to take over the office on a temporary basis. Trump said Wednesday that Clayton would get his Senate hearing in two weeks.

Clayton’s nomination has drawn a generally positive response from senators. But Democrats have reacted furiously to Pulte’s elevation, and even some Republicans have expressed concern about installing someone with no prior intelligence community experience as acting DNI. The fight has already affected Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, a key spying authority that had appeared headed for reauthorization in early June before Democrats balked in protest of moving forward with Pulte at the head of ODNI.

]]>

GenAI.mil records almost 1.7M users, plans new model additions

Alexandra Kelley — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 09:00:00 -0400

The Department of Defense plans to bring new models onto its internal, department-wide artificial intelligence marketplace and deploy them at higher classification levels, part of its updated procurement policy that aims for “commercial-first” in its deliverables.

Cameron Stanley, the chief digital and artificial intelligence officer at DOD told attendees at the AWS Summit in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday that as GenAI.mil reached a record 1.7 million users—along with the creation of over 100,000 custom agents—even more models will soon be made available on the platform.

“We're looking forward to advancing, getting new models on to GenAI.mil, we're looking at GenAI.mil going to higher classification levels,” Stanley said. “It's just a really exciting time for generative AI in the department.”

GenAI.mil already hosts capabilities from SpaceX, OpenAI, Google, NVIDIA, Reflection, Microsoft, Oracle, and Amazon Web Services that are available at Impact Level 6 and 7, as the Pentagon announced in May.

OpenAI confirmed in mid-June that its flagship chatbot, ChatGPT, will be eligible for controlled, unclassified information through GenAI.mil in July.

One major use of AI for the DOD has been to aggregate data for warfighters, resulting in faster decision-making. While Stanley said that “well-trained” soldiers, sailors, airmen, guardians and marines traditionally make these critical military decisions, AI is helpful in parsing through large volumes of data quickly

“Human cognition is just not going to be able to keep up in a lot of battlefields,” he said. “So what we've done—very successfully—is identify ways where we can accelerate certain identification of the right pieces of data or information in order to make that better decision.”

Stanley clarified that the addition of agentic tools to support analytics is deliberate, and features “very tight guardrails” to accelerate the analyses that he estimates would take two to three human analysts operating in disparate systems to identify.

“So we go from—instead of having six or seven systems we have to go across in order to make that decision—we're now doing it instantaneously, or nearly instantaneously, with humans appropriately managing the entire workload process and actioning it from the same system that we identified the decision from,” he said.

The goal of Stanley’s office, he said, is to be a “commercial-first organization.”

“We're trying to put the vendor next to the warfighter and have the vendor have one goal, one job, that's it, and that is to deliver exactly what the warfighter’s needs are,” Stanley said. “What we do is we create the environment with the right tools and the right environments with the right security in place with the right contracts in place.”

]]>

Under new management: the Pentagon’s autonomous systems get new oversight

Lauren C. Williams — Wed, 01 Jul 2026 21:10:48 -0400

All of the Pentagon’s drone and counterdrone efforts for air, land, and sea will now fall under a new organization and director who will report to the deputy defense secretary, according to a memo released Wednesday.

“Unmanned and autonomous systems are a strategic priority” and “essential to maintaining decisive military advantage,” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth wrote in a memo dated June 29 that was released Wednesday.

The new czar, called the direct reporting portfolio manager for unmanned offensive and defensive systems, or DRPM-UxS, will oversee all the Pentagon’s unmanned and autonomous initiatives, including the Joint Interagency Task Force 401 and the Defense Autonomous Warfare Group, plus efforts under the Defense Innovation Unit, military departments, and components.

Leaders of JIATF-401 and DAWG will be “dual-hatted as elements under the DRPM-UxS,” whose director will steer “all missions, functions, and associated programmatic funding lines currently assigned,” effective immediately, the memo states.

DIU will be the Pentagon’s primary liaison with commercial companies for all “unmanned and autonomous systems programs within the DRPM-UxS portfolio,” the memo states. The DRPM will also serve as the head of the sUAS Industrial Base Working Group.

The move mimics one the Air Force made late last year when it collapsed several of its largest programs, from the B-21 to Sentinel and Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles, under the direct reporting portfolio manager for critical major weapons systems role.

That change followed the Pentagon’s acquisitions overhaul and put Air Force Gen. Dale White in the Senate-confirmed seat. Air Force officials have said the new role has helped get programs back on track, such as the troubled Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile program, which triggered a Nunn-McCurdy Act review in 2024 due to massive cost overruns.

It’s unclear whether the DRPM for unmanned systems will require Senate confirmation, or who will fill the position.

The new DRPM also comes as the Pentagon accelerates plans to use drones across the services to keep up with modern warfare uses, and as lawmakers propose an all-robotics combatant command.

The reorganization aims to streamline and speed up how the Pentagon and military services buy, develop, and field unmanned systems, the memo suggests.

For example, the DRPM would also be responsible for existing and future marketplaces where drones and counterdrone systems can be bought—similar to the ones operated by the Army and Navy. New marketplaces can only be created with DRPM-UxS approval, the memo states.

Some of the first tasks the DRPM for unmanned and related systems would take on:

Hiring for management, legal counsel, IT, contracting, and other roles;
Creating an organization chart delineating responsibilities and authorities across the portfolio;
Outlining all military service and component programs that would fall under the new portfolio “to include cost, schedule, resourcing, personnel, industry performance, and operational impacts;”
Developing an implementation plan; and
Providing regular progress and program updates to the deputy defense secretary.

The memo also creates an executive board chaired by the Pentagon’s no. 2, along with the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs, military department heads, and defense undersecretaries for acquisition and research and engineering as members.

Thomas Novelly contributed to this report.

]]>

Defense Business Brief: A radar-maker’s answer to the drone boom; the Army’s private capital appetite; One lawmaker’s caution for contractors

Lauren C. Williams — Wed, 01 Jul 2026 13:55:23 -0400

WASHINGTON—The counterdrone industry is booming. So to keep up with—and anticipate—demands, radar-maker Echodyne wants to make 30,000 units a year by early 2028.

The company, which is headquartered in Washington state, began building out a new facility near Seattle earlier this year and plans to have it up and running in July. The $40 million plant is expected to ultimately produce at least 30,000 radars a year—an approximate five-fold increase.

“Our orders are far exceeding our production capacity, which is why we've launched into this new manufacturing facility,” said Eben Frankenberg, the company’s CEO. “The whole counterdrone problem today is that you have this massive number of cheap lethal drones, and you need a massive number of cheap lethal counterdrone systems to defend against those. And so, people want high-performance radars that are cost effective and can be deployed at a big scale, so that's what we're doing.”

Echodyne’s radars can be found on all kinds of counter-UAS systems that can be affixed to combat vehicles, ships, and other devices across the defense industry.

Construction timelines, which slated the facility to be fully built by 2028, have been sped up by about a year to meet and keep pace with future demand, Frankenberg said. There’s a ribbon cutting ceremony for the new plant next week.

“We had a multi-year plan for the build up of the facility, and we're moving all that forward. So we originally had a build out in ‘26, ‘27, ‘28—and now we're doing all of [planned] ‘26 and ‘27 build out this year,” he said.

The facility will support about 200 employees and Echodyne’s operations business, including supply chain manufacturing.

By 2028, the facility should be producing tens of thousands of radars annually. And could be the “blueprint” for future plants.

“We're shipping lots of radars to Europe. We're also shipping radars to Southeast Asia, India,” Frankenberg said. “And we're seeing just demand increase globally. So, this factory, this new facility represents what we think we need from a capacity perspective in the coming few years. But the other nice thing is it gives us a blueprint to potentially open in future locations,” including internationally.

Welcome

You’ve reached the Defense Business Brief, where we dig into what the Pentagon buys, who they’re buying from, and why. Send along your tips, feedback, and song recommendations to lwilliams@defenseone.com. Check out the Defense Business Brief archive here, and tell your friends to subscribe!

The Army’s appetite for private capital. When asked (by me) if the service is considering public-private arrangements to build innovation centers or next-gen manufacturing facilities, Lynda Armer, the executive director of Army Contracting Command at Rock Island Arsenal said:

“Yes, that certainly would be an opportunity that the Army is interested in: companies coming in and building new capability within our [Organic Industrial Base] footprint, and then utilizing our workforce training, our workforce upskilling,” she told reporters following the Association of the U.S. Army’s acquisition and contracting event June 25.
“What we don't want is to be stuck in the 1940s. That's when most of our facilities were stood up, and they've been modernized to a small extent over time. In some cases, we might have new lines and new buildings, but we still have 1940s infrastructure that we're trying to modernize.”
Some context for the question: The Navy has inked similar arrangements near its Naval Surface Warfare Centers in Crane, Ind., and Indian Head, Md. The Pentagon’s industrial base policy chief has also suggested more private investment in the OIB.
“They don't have to go find green space and start from scratch. We have infrastructure there, but if they can add to that, modernize it, give us new capabilities and new training, that's a benefit for both sides,” Armer said. “It continues to grow our organic industrial base, and so we don't become stagnant, and we keep up with the speed at which our requirements and technology are changing.”

BONUS: The Army’s venture-capital style office FUZE is planning to release an annual report later this year, said FUZE’s private capital integrator, Lt. Col. Sam Spencer-Pittman.

The FUZE office gets about $750 million a year—merging existing Army funding lines, including about $420 million from SBIR/STTR and about $270 million for its Tech Maturation Program.
The goal: “Connect companies to capital,” Spencer-Pittman told reporters at the AUSA event. “We don't tell these private industry or the venture capital guys…[that] we want this office to work with this company. It's more, ‘hey, these companies are seeking capital. If this works for your investment portfolio or thesis, call Bill’…and see what works out.”
FUZE has only been around for about a year but is “on a glide path and moving fast,” Spencer-Pittman said.
An upcoming report is expected to detail what the office has achieved in its first year.

New Congress, new contract scrutiny? Midterms are around the corner, which means Congress could look very different in January. That could also mean more questions or probes around the Pentagon’s use of rapid acquisition tools, said Rep. James Walkinshaw, D-Va, who sits on the House Committee for Government Oversight.

“I'm asked a lot [about] what will next year look like if Democrats are in control of at least the House. And I say this to the contractors in my district every day: There will be very heavy scrutiny of the contracting practices in this administration—both in DOD [and] DHS, especially, and other agencies. And those companies that continue to do things by the book the way that they did before this administration, maybe they lost some business in the last couple years, but they're going to be happy that they continue to do things by the book,” Walkinshaw said, answering my question in an interview with the GovExec news team on Monday.
“Those companies that didn't…and the contracts they receive are going to face a lot of scrutiny.”
A related aside: Pentagon testing and evaluation officials raised concerns that military departments could use the middle-tier acquisition pathway to circumvent certain live-fire testing requirements, according to a Government Accountability Office study released Tuesday. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth slashed staff last year in the office of the director, operational test and evaluation, which oversees weapons testing. The GAO is studying the effects of the reorganization.

Making moves + other news

The Atlantic is diving into the second Trump administration’s use of private Signal chats— after Hegseth’s ‘war plans’ scandal.
Anduril is meshing its mobile command post with a portable Amazon data center, the companies announced Tuesday. If bought and used, that could mean more AI use and more ISR in environments where connectivity is sparse.
Billionaire venture capitalist Marc Andressen joins the Pentagon’s policy advisory board. His firm a16z backs several contract-winning startups, including Anduril, Castelion, Hadrian, Saronic, Shield AI, Skydio, and SpaceX. Andressen joins Michael Pillsbury, who previously chaired the board in 2020.
The Pentagon surreptitiously hosted several up-and-coming munitions makers to talk about production, Breaking Defense reported.
Firefly Aerospace won a $144 million NASA contract and is nearing the final stages of launchpad construction at the SSC Space Esrange Space Center in Sweden. The first launch is expected in 2028.

Correction: Echodyne wants to complete its facility build out for increased production by early 2028.

]]>

Philippine exercise showcased Marine Littoral Regiment’s growth

Jennifer Hlad — Wed, 01 Jul 2026 09:15:26 -0400

Exercise Balikatan was “a real strategic victory” that showed how far the 3rd Marine Littoral Regiment has come, its commander said.

“There's a lot more growth to happen, there's a lot more work. But this was a pretty good year to kind of showcase something that went from concept to a real capability that certainly the joint force and the combined force is appreciative of,” Col. Gabe Diana told Defense One by phone from the Philippines, where he was preparing for exercise Kamandag.

During Balikatan in May, “3rd MLR basically did exactly what it was designed to do, and that’s serve as a forward distributed stand-in force that’s capable of then integrating joint and combined combat power inside of a strategically significant maritime area here.”

The Hawaii-based 3rd MLR was activated in 2022 as the first unit of its kind. The Corps in 2023 transitioned a unit in Okinawa into the 12th Marine Littoral Regiment and last year scrapped plans for an additional MLR. The units specialize in warfare in the shallow waters near the shore and were designed for operations in the Indo-Pacific.

During Balikatan, the 3rd MLR served as mission commander for the joint task force maritime strike, Diana said, which included U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps capabilities as well as troops from the Philippines, Japan, and Canada.

“We were able to synchronize sensors, intelligence, aviation, maneuver formations, long-range precision fires, from across the combined joint force,” he said. “I think for us, I think the key takeaway here is that we were able to operationalize a lot of the stuff that the commandant is talking about with ‘any sensor, any shooter.’”

The regiment also served as mission commander for maritime key terrain security operations in the northern part of the Philippines, and as mission commander for the integrated air missile defense during Balikatan.

Even getting from Hawaii to the Philippines quickly was a learning opportunity, Diana said.

“There were challenges, but it really replicated some of the fog and friction that you would see if you had to close the force in crisis,” he said. “So it was just an excellent rep, to have to close in a very short amount of time, and then integrate into a larger combined joint architecture, and then get right into the fight.”

And while the regiment demonstrated growth, Diana said the exercise was not a “spike the football” moment. Rather, he said, it was a “demonstration of capability… a data point that says, ‘yes, we can do these things,’ and we’ll continue to mature those capabilities.”

“This is a journey, not a destination,” he added.

]]>

Marines from multiple nations train together for potential future conflict

Jennifer Hlad — Wed, 01 Jul 2026 07:50:15 -0400

MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII—On rifle ranges inside a volcanic crater, and in an urban training facility built to train for deployments to Iraq, Marines from several different countries spent the weekend alongside their U.S. counterparts, shooting rifles, clearing rooms, and practicing other tactical skills they’ll need if called to war.

The live-fire drills were part of the ongoing Exercise Rim of the Pacific, a massive naval exercise that this year brought together 30 countries with the theme “partners: integrated and prepared.”

Working together in this way “sets the foundation for how we actually operate in the world today, and how we might fight—we don’t fight alone,” U.S. Marine Maj. Gen. Valerie Jackson told Defense One amid the staccato rifle shots of Mexican and South Korean marines training nearby. “This is all about alliances and partnerships, and when a crisis comes, you don’t want the first time working with someone to be when you’re facing a very determined adversary…. When a crisis hits, you have to know that the person to your left and your right has the same level of competency and understanding of the operational environment.”

The U.S. Marines here and at the urban training facility at Marine Corps Training Area Bellows are from 2nd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment, the ground combat element of the 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit.

Lt. Col. Colin Elsasser, commander of 2/7, said the training included different skill sets from jungle survival to how to approach “complex urban environments.” Over the course of a week, they will train on the “entire inventory of infantry weapons,” he said.

Col. Robb McDonald, commander of the 15th MEU, said things had gone smoothly so far and that the U.S. Marines were learning from the other marines, and vice versa.

“We see this as an opportunity to integrate and learn from each other,” he said. RIMPAC is “a showcase to that interoperability that we’re able to achieve.”

]]>

Anduril and Amazon’s mobile data center venture aims to bring edge computing to the frontlines

Thomas Novelly — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 19:48:49 -0400

Amazon Web Services and Anduril are combining the tech giant’s on-site cloud computers and the defense contractor’s mobile data center to bring edge computing to the frontlines. Both have already been used during the Iran war.

Anduril’s containerized command and data center, Menace-I, can now be outfitted with Amazon Web Services’s Outpost, the two companies announced Tuesday. With two people, the mobile data center “can stand up in under 10 minutes and moves by truck, rail, airlift, or helicopter sling load,” the company said in a press release.

“Whether it's an intelligence analyst in the field or whether it's a flightline operator, someone who's literally trying to get information off of the system, the sensor, and making a meaningful decision about it. What's really different, and what we're seeing is this ruggedized edge,” said Liz Martin, AWS’ global defense managing director and general manager. “It takes very many shapes.”

During a panel at the AWS Summit in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday, an Anduril company executive told reporters that Menace-I had been used during Operation Epic Fury and the containerized command center has been deployed with the Army, Air Force, Marines, and Navy. AWS Outpost has also been deployed in the region, but in protected structures, Martin said. Combining the two together would allow the U.S. military and other defense buyers to put cloud computing as close to the battlefield action as possible and cut down on the time it takes to transfer data in combat.

On Tuesday, AWS named the California-based contractor its “preferred edge provider” for defense customers.

“We're bringing that cloud capability, we're bringing it down to the edge, and then we're enabling you to run applications that may exist in the cloud down at the edge to provide data down at the edge, or to send things from the edge up to the cloud, where they can be analyzed,” said Tom Keane, Anduril’s senior vice president of engineering. “What we're doing is we're providing capabilities for commanders that today they either don't have or are simply too expensive and too difficult for them to practically field and use in real world.”

Anduril’s containerized command center was first launched in 2022. Last year, U.S. Marines strapped a Menace-I onto a CH-53K King Stallion helicopter for transport.

It’s not clear how survivable the shipping container data center would be on the battlefield. During Operation Epic Fury, six U.S. Army reservists were killed when a makeshift operations center fortified by concrete walls was hit in an Iranian attack.

“I think part of what we're seeing in the world right now is a desire to be distributing many systems, as opposed to a singular, highly resilient system,” Keane said. “The idea of distribution as a mechanism for fault tolerance, having many, is becoming increasingly important, is what we're hearing from our customers, as opposed to having a singular thing that is immensely and infinitely robust.”

]]>

AWS launches Secret Cloud for industry’s classified workloads

Frank Konkel — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 17:21:00 -0400

Amazon Web Services on Tuesday announced a new cloud offering designed to run contractor-owned classified workloads, a first for the defense industrial base and select research institutions that historically have had to build and maintain costly on-premesis infrastructure to support classified programs.

The AWS Secret Cloud for Industry, or ASCI, is designed to reduce the provision time for classified environments up to the Secret classification level from months to days, according to Dave Levy, vice president of AWS Public Sector. The cloud is designed for cleared U.S. defense contractors, research institutions, and other organizations in the National Industrial Security Program.

"America's defense industrial base builds the capabilities that keep this nation safe, and it's time they have the tools to match the urgency of the mission," Levy said. "AWS Secret Cloud for Industry puts the full power of cloud computing and AI directly into the hands of the engineers and scientists working on our most sensitive programs. Now, the defense industrial base can innovate at the speed the moment demands, using the same classified infrastructure trusted by the Department of War.”

AWS Secret Cloud for Industry now holds a provisional authorization at the Impact Level 6, or IL6—the standard for Secret-classified information—and leverages the Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency compliance framework that cleared contractors and personnel already use for on-premesis classified systems to the cloud.

Northrop Grumman is the first defense contractor to deploy classified workloads on ASCI. Without the purpose-built cloud, their initial workload in the AWS Secret-East Region would have taken months.

“Migrating our critical classified programs to the AWS Secret Cloud for Industry solution fundamentally changes how we develop and scale sensitive programs at speed to deliver when it matters most,” Drew Barnes, vice president of IT infrastructure and operations at Northrop Grumman, said in a statement.

In a press call with reporters in advance of the AWS Summit in Washington, D.C., Levy said there has been “a lot of demand for a solution like this for a long time.”

"I’m excited that we, along with the government and the DIB, have been able to figure it out,” said Levy, crediting the Defense Information Systems Agency and DCSA for their partnership in the yearslong effort.

During a keynote speech at AWS Summit, Levy also announced the ASCI Accelerator Initiative, providing up to $20 million to qualified DIB contractors, federally funded research and development centers, independent software vendors and system integrators. Levy said the funding will help select organizations migrate classified workloads to the cloud and improve mission outcomes.

That announcement follows a $50 billion investment the company made in November to improve AI and supercomputing infrastructure for U.S. federal agencies.

“We're also investing up to $50 billion to expand AI and supercomputing infrastructure across all GovCloud, secret and top-secret regions,” Levy said. “The goal is to provide 1.3 gigawatts of AI capacity, making a generational commitment to the future of government that government runs on secure, intelligent cloud.”

A 15-year focus on government

AWS launched AWS GovCloud (US-West) — the first cloud infrastructure designed for government customers—in 2011, providing many federal agencies with their first opportunity to shift workloads to the cloud. In 2013, AWS inked a groundbreaking $600 million contract, C2S, with the CIA to supply commercial cloud services to all 18 intelligence agencies.

The cloud provider later launched its first secret cloud region in 2017. It also operates multiple top-secret regions and has been awarded multiple major, multi-billion dollar contracts, including the C2E contract from the intelligence community, as well as the Joint Warfighting Cloud Capability contract for the Defense Department and the National Security Agency’s “Wild and Stormy” contract. Today, nearly all U.S. federal agencies are AWS customers in some capacity, along with some 15,000 government agencies across the globe.

Last August, AWS worked with the General Services Administration—through its OneGov program—to discount $1 billion worth of its software to customers across the federal government through December 2028. The discounts have provided dividends for AWS.

“We’ve seen not just new agencies [coming to AWS], but agencies already doing business with us accelerate their modernization efforts through the OneGov agreement with GSA,” Levy said in an interview Tuesday.

More investment in the U.S. intelligence community

Following AWS’ OneGov deal, the company engaged the U.S. intelligence community by proposing a similar effort, according to Levy.AWS on Tuesday announced the result of that engagement: an investment of up to $1 billion in cloud credits to help the 18 agencies within the U.S. intelligence community through October 2030 to modernize their IT systems.

“It’s like GSA OneGov, but for the IC,” Levy said. “The same $1 billion opportunity we put forth for OneGov, we wanted to do the same thing for the IC.”

Called the Intelligence Community Accelerated Modernization Framework, or ICAMF, the program makes use of AWS’ existing C2E contract with the U.S. intelligence community to provide credits for qualified workloads “to accelerate cloud migration and modernization” across the IC, according to David Appel, vice president of global government at AWS.

In a statement, Appel said “outcome-based credits based on post-migration value dramatically lower the financial barrier to moving to the cloud.” In addition, he said the investment would accelerate migration timelines, enable mission-critical capabilities and align investment with outcomes.

“The ICAMF supports the Intelligence Community's strategic priorities to modernize IT infrastructure, improve data interoperability, and adopt advanced technologies at pace with evolving threats,” Appel said. “The program enables agencies to leverage the most advanced cloud capabilities while achieving meaningful cost efficiencies—delivering improved mission outcomes with the speed and agility that national security demands.”

]]>

Lawmaker warns of administration’s ‘fetishization’ of Silicon Valley startups

Alexandra Kelley, Ross Wilkers, Edward Graham, and David DiMolfetta — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:15:00 -0400

Rep. James Walkinshaw has big plans for the federal government’s sprawling tech stack, including scrutinizing the contracting practices of the current administration.

In an extensive sit-down interview with Nextgov/FCW and other GovExec reporters, the Democratic congressman from Virginia said that he wants to help rebuild the federal government’s capacity after sweeping disruption carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency—from strengthening civil service protections and tech talent pipelines to tightening cybersecurity guardrails on AI and reviving oversight tools like the FITARA scorecard and FedRAMP.

“I’m starting to talk to my colleagues about a comprehensive and robust agenda to rebuild the capacity of the federal government, an American capacity agenda, for lack of a better term,” he said in the Monday interview.

“We’re obviously in this post-DOGE era, where, in my view, a lot of damage has been done, 300,000 federal workers lost,” he said, adding that many of the staff lost at offices across the federal enterprise were those experienced with technology and understood how their agencies worked.

His plan, he added, is focused around three pillars—talent, technology and delivery—that center on rebuilding a battered federal workforce, speeding secure AI and tech modernization, and pushing agencies to measure success by whether people actually receive services and mission tools on time, not just whether they satisfy oversight checklists.

Contractor oversight

Walkinshaw said that if Democrats take the House majority in this year’s midterms, there will be “heavy scrutiny of the contracting practices” of the current Trump administration. Contracts with the Defense and Homeland Security departments would fall under that purview, he said.

So too would any contractors who donated to the White House ballroom renovation and other ancillary projects pushed by the Trump administration, he added.

“Those companies that continued to do things by the book, the way that they did before this administration, maybe they lost some business in the last couple years, but they're going to be happy that they continued to do things by the book,” Walkinshaw said. “Those that played by the Trump rules … those companies and the contracts they received are going to face a lot of scrutiny.”

Watchdog groups and Democrats have raised questions of late about whether companies with federal business interests are helping bankroll Trump-backed projects while also receiving or seeking government work. The White House ballroom project has become a particular flashpoint, after several reports and analyses tied some donors to major federal contractors and raised concerns about donor anonymity, conflict-of-interest safeguards and the use of public funds.

On defense contracting, Walkinshaw also took aim at what he called the Trump administration’s “fetishization” of Silicon Valley firms, saying he fears the current White House has leaned too much into startup culture to solve defense tech problems that also require sustained oversight, procurement standards and basic IT management.

“I do worry that with this administration, especially, there might be too much of a fetishization of a certain kind of company, the Silicon Valley-based startup,” he said.

The comments reflect a broader debate amid the Trump 2.0 push to swiftly bring more commercial technology firms into national security work, particularly as both defense and civilian agencies look to buy software, AI tools and other evolving technologies more quickly.

Supporters have seen that shift as a necessary challenge to slow-moving acquisition systems and legacy prime contractors. Critics, however, warn that speed and startup culture are not substitutes for procurement safeguards, cybersecurity requirements, long-term maintenance and oversight of how those tools are actually used.

Cybersecurity

Walkinshaw noted that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency stands as a prime example of the Trump administration making sweeping cuts and then later having to reverse course. The agency’s workforce has been significantly cut over the past year under efficiency-driven efforts and other prevailing GOP misgivings about the cyberdefense shop.

CISA acting director Nick Andersen recently said the agency intends to hire around 330 people in the coming months. Last week, Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said the cyber unit likely needs around 600 hires and that it might take a year to bring them on.

But the congressman argued restaffing will be more difficult than many anticipate.

“I don’t think that there’s a lot of high-level introspection at the highest levels of these agencies about the negative impacts,” he said. Staffing up at CISA again is a “very difficult thing to do after you’ve just attacked people, abused them, denigrated their service, and then said ‘we want you to want to come back.’”

Cybersecurity has long drawn bipartisan support in Washington, but CISA has become a recurring target of Republican scrutiny over its past work countering election-related disinformation. Since last year, Trump officials have sought to “refocus” the agency’s mission, arguing that CISA had strayed too far from its core mission set.

On other government cyber matters, Walkinshaw said he’s especially concerned about shadow IT — tech and AI tools used without management approval — inside federal agencies, and he plans to introduce amendments in upcoming appropriations measures that would address basic “blocking and tackling” cyberdefense, which he says is “even more important now in an advanced AI world.”

He is also planning amendments focused on event logging—digital records that show what happened on a system and when—to “try to get agencies to actually follow the law and log those cyber incidents when they occur.”

Walkinshaw, along with Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., introduced legislation on June 25 that would require the Department of Homeland Security to provide lawmakers with a report on identified gaps that prevent the agency from fully meeting event logging requirements.

FITARA scorecard

Rep. Gerry Connolly, D-Va., who died last year, was one of the original sponsors of the 2014 Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act, or FITARA, meant to help the federal government better onboard and use new technologies. Walkinshaw previously spent over a decade working as the chief of staff for Connolly, and he was elected last September to finish the rest of Connolly’s term.

The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, in collaboration with the Government Accountability Office, released its first FITARA scorecard in November 2015 to grade agencies’ tech modernization and oversight efforts on an A to F scale. Since then, the biannual scorecard has served as an oversight mechanism for many agencies, although the most recent iteration of the scorecard was released back in September 2024.

Walkinshaw said the committee’s current Republican leadership “has kind of walked away” from releasing the scorecard, citing the lack of hearings held by the Cybersecurity, Information Technology and Government Innovation Subcommittee panel, in particular. He attributed this to the GOP majority’s desire to avoid subpoena fights over multiple Trump-era controversies.

But that public grading system is important, Walkinshaw stressed, because “it’s necessary and valuable to have an outside forcing mechanism to push for change and innovation.”

The rapid pace of technological change, he said, means “there’s an opportunity to incorporate technologies that were not available three years ago or five years ago that could make many of our functions more effective and more efficient, but if it’s not done thoughtfully and intentionally, it could also go horribly, horribly wrong, and Congress has a huge stake in ensuring that we get it right.”

In addition to resuming the scorecard—something the congressman posited would likely happen if Democrats retake the House in the upcoming midterm elections—Walkinshaw said the current grading scale should be modernized to account for advances in artificial intelligence and cybersecurity threats.

“The question is obviously, ‘how do you develop those metrics in a way that’s objective?’ But I think that scorecard proved to be over time a good forcing mechanism to nudge agencies to modernize,” Walkinshaw said.

When it comes to further AI use across the federal government, Walkinshaw said a grade related to the adoption of the capabilities could also be helpful for better understanding if agencies are effectively leveraging the technologies and not locking themselves into potentially expensive programs, noting that it is “very hard to unwind after you’ve committed to it.”

FedRAMP modernization

Walkinshaw noted that the government’s cloud security assessment and authorization initiative—the Federal Risk and Authorization Management Program, or FedRAMP—will need to be reauthorized next year. GSA is in the process of rolling out a FedRAMP 20x initiative to modernize the authorization process for cloud providers.

He said continuing the program is “100% necessary”—a process he expects to be bipartisan—and added that “if it’s not reauthorized, any administration could basically shut down the program, and then we go back to every cloud provider for every service for every agency starting their [authorization to operate] process from scratch.”

He similarly expressed concerns about the program’s long-term financial backing, pointing out that it is supported through the General Services Administration’s Federal Citizen Services Fund, which means “it’s basically what GSA decides, so it doesn’t really have stable funding.”

He also said he believes “there should be in statute stronger requirements for the FedRAMP office to engage with industry and with the public,” noting that “they do it right now but it’s been sporadic over the years.” And streamlining agency adoption of cloud services, he added, is another area where he believes the program can be tweaked for the better.

Walkinshaw noted that providers still need to receive an ATO from agencies after receiving FedRAMP authorization and said “those agencies need to retain some responsibility for what’s operating on their networks,” but added that “I’d like to explore ways to close that gap, because I still hear from businesses that feel like they’re redoing some of the work that they did during their FedRAMP certification when they’re going to get their ATO at their at their agency.”

AI legislation forecast

Despite Reps. Jay Obernolte, R-Calif., and Lori Trahan, D-N.Y., releasing a discussion draft of AI legislation earlier this month that would, among other things, preempt state AI laws, Walkinshaw said that finalization of a national AI regulatory framework is unlikely until early next year.

“I don’t think you’ll see traction on any kind of large AI package before the election,” he said. “I think both sides are in a kind of ‘wait-and-see’ mode.”

Walkinshaw added that House Republicans are broadly happy to let the White House take the lead on developing and disseminating an AI regulatory framework, and that Democrats are not confident they can get a satisfactory bill passed at this time.

“In terms of big picture packages, it’s going to be next year,” he said. “Then the question will be, ‘If Democrats are in control of Congress, is there a compromise between what we develop––which will come out of our commission––and what the president will be willing to sign?’”

Among potential provisions that could make it into national AI regulation, he added, standards export controls placed on AI products could become a notable feature, given the federal government’s recent decision to restrict the release of certain Anthropic products, following conflict over the company’s decision to limit how its products could be used.

“Companies like Anthropic deserve to have some certainty as to what the process is going to be, so they can make investments, and the American people deserve some sense that there’s a process to ensure safety with respect to advanced models, so hopefully we’ll get there early next year,” Walkinshaw said.

]]>

Pentagon recruiting new tech talent for AI implementation

Patrick Tucker — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 10:04:38 -0400

The Pentagon on Tuesday announced a new campaign to recruit hundreds of young programmers for AI and engineering challenges, according to an advance notice seen by Defense One.

“War Force is a call to action for patriotic forward-deployed engineers who want to serve their country and the warfighter,” Defense Department CTO Emil Michael said in a statement viewed by Defense One.

Successful applicants, referred to in this OPM job listing for a “forward deployed engineer(s),” will work for two-year stints to implement the department’s AI Acceleration Strategy as well as other critical IT needs. Most of the positions will be based in Washington, D.C., and candidates should be able to hold a top-secret clearance.

The “War Force” is a part of a broader push between the White House and participating tech companies to bring early-stage software talent into the federal government, an effort dubbed “Tech Force.”

Those selected to participate will work with a variety of teams on implementing frontier AI, machine learning, automation, scaling new software tools and solving other critical IT needs across the military and the Department.

War Force recruits will “join a cohort of individuals that receive leadership training, get exposure to America's top technology CEOs and gain unparalleled exposure to policymaking and national-scale impact,” according to the listing. “This may include CEO fireside chats, networking events, coding training/certificates, and other opportunities.”

]]>

Pentagon launches ‘War Force’ initiative to onboard tech talent

Edward Graham — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 09:45:00 -0400

The Office of Personnel Management and the Pentagon jointly announced the launch of a new initiative on Tuesday to bring top software engineering talent into the Department of Defense, part of a broader governmentwide push to hire more skilled technologists.

The recruitment effort, called War Force, operates under OPM’s larger Tech Force program. That initiative launched in December 2025 to onboard tech and cybersecurity professionals across federal agencies, although it notably followed Trump administration moves to let go of thousands of tech-focused workers and shutter several innovation-focused units.

OPM Director Scott Kupor said in a statement that War Force “builds on the momentum of Tech Force by connecting outstanding engineers with opportunities to solve complex challenges alongside the War Department.”

President Donald Trump signed an executive order last September that authorized DOD to use the “secondary title” of War Department — framing that is also reflected in the initiative's name.

OPM said the War Force recruitment effort “will launch with a targeted hiring campaign,” with a focus on bringing in applicants who have experience “deploying and integrating advanced technologies — including frontier AI, machine learning, automation, and data systems — and designing, building, and maintaining reliable software solutions that directly support operational needs on behalf of the American warfighter.” Job applications will be accepted through July 10.

Pentagon Chief Technology Officer Emil Michael said in a statement that the War Force will help with “executing the key tenets of the War Department’s AI Acceleration Strategy.” That guidance was released in January and outlines the department’s plans for rapidly integrating AI capabilities into its operations.

The War Force recruitment effort also comes after DOD announced in April that it was launching a cyber apprenticeship program this summer to bring more skilled personnel into the agency.

During public remarks at the SAP NOW summit in Washington, D.C., last week, Pentagon Chief Information Officer Kirsten Davies said the apprenticeship program “has already generated more than 70,000 inquiries,” despite the effort not officially launching until July.

]]>

Army using AI, robot boats for Pacific logistics

Jennifer Hlad — Tue, 30 Jun 2026 07:22:25 -0400

The Army’s 8th Theater Sustainment Command is using artificial intelligence “to help us make better-informed decisions” for supply chain management in the Pacific, the unit’s commander said Friday.

“For logistics, a lot of what we do is very similar to what the commercial world does, and so I have leveraged, and we are leveraging commercial partners with, you know, how do they do warehouse management regionally, and then how do they look at, how do you time delivery of supplies to the location it’s needed, and kind of, what are those time-distance factors,” Maj. Gen. Gavin Gardner told reporters. “ I’m looking at partners, and I’m talking to partners that do that on a global scale, because the distances between the continental United States to the forward positions that we train or live at, like the Republic of Korea or Japan, we’re constantly looking for smarter ways to do that.”

“When resources are not unlimited, how do you best look at demand analysis over time and space, and stock forward the right things versus stocking everything? Because we just can’t afford to do that,” he said. “And so we’re using AI right now to help us see that.”

The command is also already using “very capable” autonomous watercraft in the Pacific and is working with industry to develop and test larger and faster vessels, Gardner said.

“We have industry partners that are creating vessels right now in the water that are over 100 feet long that would move anywhere between four and eight 20-foot equivalent units… think the containers you see moving up and down most of your ports today,” he said. “That capability is already in play, and it’s going through experimentation now, and the 8th TSC, along with the rest of the United States Army, is looking to partner, test, and innovate those autonomous watercraft first out in our region, because if you can work in the Pacific, you can work anywhere in the world.”

But the rules will need to evolve to keep up. Current U.S. maritime laws require a minimum crew size for vessels, limiting autonomous operations to testing or pilot programs for commercial use.

“We need to get the laws of the sea that our Coast Guard currently use to mandate watercraft operations that currently have to be manned when it enters into a port, that we’re comfortable having unmanned systems enter into ports, so that we can rapidly receive and download autonomous watercraft like we do manned watercraft today,” Gardner added.

Gardner said he’d also eventually like to see “anywhere between 30 and 100” medium-sized autonomous vessels in the U.S. Indo-Pacific theater, “berthed up everywhere from Korea to Japan, the Philippines, Australia, Singapore, Thailand,” to help meet the “constant demand for Army watercraft time now to deliver equipment and supplies in the theater.”

The unit has one Maneuver Support Vessel (Light), a manned landing craft that will eventually replace the Vietnam-era Landing Craft Mechanized-8, and has been testing it for about nine months to get data to shape the future design of the vessel. The vessel is nearly four times faster than the older watercraft, and much smaller—but also “much more capable” of operating in shallower water, Gardner said.

“So I’m actually going to different sets of beaches, and so you can put up to two HIMARS onto an MSV-Light, approach a beach very rapidly, bring it into position, download it, and then those platforms can get off and do their fire missions,” he said. “We’ve rehearsed this quite a bit with both the 25th Infantry Division and the 3rd Multi-Domain Task Force,” and have also put multiple Marine NMESIS anti-ship systems onto the vessel for “rapid insertions.”

]]>

Marine Corps inks first contract for autonomous ground vehicle production

Lauren C. Williams — Mon, 29 Jun 2026 21:22:08 -0400

The Marine Corps will pay Overland AI $19.7 million to produce more than a dozen autonomous ground vehicles by early 2027.

The vehicles, due to be delivered in about nine months, will be part of the Marine Air Defense Integrated Systems program, which is part of the service’s counterdrone approach, and support resupply missions.

“Ground autonomy matters now more than ever. We're seeing the proliferation of uncrewed ground vehicles in conflicts like the one in Ukraine, and tech maturity is really there,” Byron Boots, Overland AI’s CEO told reporters. “We're registering extremely high demand from U.S. operational units who want to incorporate this technology into their concepts of operation.”

Overland recently demonstrated its autonomous offerings with the Marine Corps on a prototype for the Remotely Operated Ground Unit for Expeditionary Fires, or ROGUE Fires, program.

The robot vehicle is expected to integrate with existing Marine Corps platforms, such as the Joint Light Tactical Vehicle, or JLTV.

“We're going to start by integrating the [autonomous ground] vehicle into the system, providing a resupply capability for the other vehicles…and we may build on it from there,” Boots said.

The platform could potentially be used for other purposes, such as intelligence and surveillance.

“We've used our autonomous ground vehicles for a wide variety of different mission sets, everything from resupply to ISR to breaching,” he said. “Our understanding is that they'll initially be used for resupply, but we believe that there'll be many different possible use cases and ways to integrate this vehicle into the program.”

The company declined to specify the exact number of vehicles that would be produced or other contract details, including the type of vehicle, payload capacity, and other specifications. The contract was awarded through a rapid acquisition tool called an other transaction authority through the Accelerate the Procurement and Fielding of Innovative Technologies, or APFIT, program under the Pentagon’s research and engineering shop.

The vehicles are designed to be fully autonomous, which means they can “perceive the environment, represent it, plan through it, and control the vehicle. So you can tell it where to go, and it will make the decisions on board in order to get there,” Boots said.

A military operator can also take over the vehicle remotely. The system is designed with open architecture.

The announcement comes as military services look to incorporate autonomous systems across domains. Integrating autonomous vehicles could improve troop safety by putting robots in their place for routine and potentially hazardous missions.

“We look forward to incorporating the Overland AI capability into the Marine Corps’ Ground Based Air Defense portfolio,” Joe Klocek, the Marine Corps’ program manager for ground-based air defense, said in a news release announcing the contract. “Pairing the autonomous platforms with our Marine Air Defense Integrated System will greatly extend the operational reach and lethality of our air defense units.”

]]>

Agentic-AI tools aim to give US commanders new target options ‘within seconds’

Patrick Tucker — Sun, 28 Jun 2026 08:00:00 -0400

A new agentic-AI tool set will continuously scan intelligence feeds and operational networks to provide U.S. military commanders with targeting options “within seconds,” the Pentagon announced Thursday.

Dubbed Agent Network, the new tools will employ “agents”—artificial-intelligence entities that perform tasks on behalf of a user, such as running a scheduled search or executing an email campaign—to “continuously scan defense intelligence and operational systems, translating findings into clearly presented options,” said a press release, which added: “Agent Network does not autonomously select or strike targets; it ensures commanders remain in charge of every decision.”

The network is one of seven “pace-setting” projects originally unveiled in January along with a new Pentagon AI strategy. Key contractors in the Agent Network effort include Lumbra and Palantir, which already handles much targeting analysis through its Maven Smart Systems contract.

But expectations for what agents can currently do may be running ahead of reality. “Tasks that AI agents are instructed to perform can clearly have computational complexity beyond” what current large language model architectures can handle, Vishal Sikka—a former CEO of SAP—wrote last July.

Citing the seminal Time-Hierarchy Theorem, Sikka noted that transformer models approach difficult tasks and simple ones using the same mechanical formula. These models can only perform so many operations per “token,” which is the way large language models understand word concepts. Even dealing with seemingly simple concepts can require a large number of tokens. Because of this limitation, there is no way to get a transformer-based model to not hallucinate when the task that you give it is more complex than it has tokens to bring to that task.

“Despite their obvious power and applicability in various domains, extreme care must be used before applying LLMs to problems or use cases that require accuracy, or solving problems of non-trivial complexity,” Sikka concluded.

But Illia Pashkov, founder of SINT Labs and editor of The Agent Times, cautioned against underestimating agents’ potential.

“Agentic AI quietly stopped being a demo this year,” Pashkov said. “It's drafting code, clearing support queues, grinding through back-office work in finance and healthcare, and now it's reading intelligence. The speed is not hype. I've watched these systems compress weeks of analyst work into an afternoon.”

But their capabilities also bring risks—more than people accustomed to working with common AI chatbots might realize. Private-sector companies that have rushed to put AI agents to work are already seeing problems, Pashkov said, pointing to a company whose agent wiped a live production database. Unless carefully implemented, agents can’t tell when they’re going wrong.

“The danger was never a dumb agent; it's a confident one running without a leash, a logbook, or a human who owns the call,” he said.

A host of Defense Department offices and teams are beginning to deploy agent systems, said one DOD intelligence security official who is not directly affiliated with the Agent Network program. The official described an atmosphere of enthusiasm.

“There are so many opportunities to leverage the DOD Enterprise capabilities and allow people to build their own agents,” they said.

But the official allowed that keeping track of how every agent is performing is a major challenge. Governing all of them will be nearly impossible.

]]>

What is the Chinese military thinking about the Iran war?

Peter W. Singer — Sun, 28 Jun 2026 06:00:00 -0400

Subj: Systemic Vulnerabilities and Strategic Overextension: Takeaways from the Recent Western Asian Conflict

Comrade, As requested urgently for your upcoming briefing to the Central Military Commission, I respectfully offer this preliminary strategic analysis regarding the ongoing military conflict involving the United States and Islamic Republic of Iran.

While the current leader of the American Hegemon, President Donald Trump, has publicly expressed a desire to place this war in the "rearview mirror," our nation and the People's Liberation Army cannot afford such comforting illusions. Neither, in truth, can the Americans themselves. Grounded in dialectic principles and systems-confrontation analysis, this report distills five primary analytical breakthroughs from the conflict.

Together they validate our present strategy, while demonstrating growing—and exploitable—weaknesses and mistakes of the United States.

1: Technical Masters, Strategic Amateurs

Any rigorous analysis of American combat employment confirms that they remain shackled by ideological blindness and a cognitive flaw: the United States remains a master of the tactical, but an amateur at the strategic.

Throughout the campaign, the U.S. military conducted complex operations of immense sophistication, scale, and diversity. These merit our respect and provide certain models for further study.

But as has been the case in multiple conflicts across multiple decades, the adversary conflates the kinetic with the realization of political objectives. U.S. leaders measure progress and now claim victory based on numeric localized indicators—the total number of sorties, or physical targets struck, or the death of specific high-value leaders. In reality, none of these tactical actions yielded an outcome in which the hegemon met their various stated political goals for initiating and then sustaining the conflict.

Moreover, this conflict has led to a net diminution of global American power, which is the only measure that truly matters. In each of the dimensions of our competition—political, economic, military, diplomatic, informational, and cultural power—the American leaders end the conflict with lesser freedom of decision, reduced resources, and new problems. Even the once-overwhelming personal influence of their leader is now openly challenged in new ways inside their political system—an asset to us in future diplomatic and trade negotiations.

In sum, American strategic culture continues to possess no coherent mechanism for translating explosive energy into strategic victory.

2: America’s Growing Strategic Isolation

The conflict showed the growing vulnerability within the enemy's coalition architecture, characterized by the hegemon’s disinterest in and inability to maintain genuine alliance harmony. The United States possesses allies, but its current leadership repeatedly and overtly demonstrates that it fundamentally does not value them.

This conflict extended a longstanding pattern of hegemonistic unilateralism. Washington failed to consult its regional client states before launching destabilizing actions, leaving those allies exposed to retaliatory strikes without adequate protective systems. This has led governments in the region, but also those beyond, to question the value of these client relationships. Furthermore, when many of the hegemon's most longstanding partners outside of the region exercised their sovereign judgment and declined to participate in what they correctly assessed as a strategic mistake, U.S. leaders repeatedly attacked them, politically and personally. Current American leadership seems more focused on manifesting itself as a security threat rather than friend and protector.

Each of these factors is now exploitable in our diplomacy and information operations, as further evidence of a broader trend of American unreliability and unpredictability. We no longer have to create disunity; they do so themselves.

The same failure to appreciate alliances was mirrored at the operational and even tactical military level.

Western military observers have rightly discussed the emergence of a “learning complex” that has been built between ourselves, Russia, Iran, and Democratic People's Republic of Korea, in which not just weapons, but intelligence, tactics, and doctrine lessons are exchanged.

The value of this approach was acutely demonstrated on the battlefield. Iranian forces operationalized the latest in Russian tactics and technology, imported from the Ukraine theater, and fused them with intelligence insights provided by our forces and deniable corporations. By using sophisticated, wave-saturated drone strikes paired with decoy systems, the Iranians on multiple occasions defeated or bypassed air-defense networks, causing massive damage to bases and critical infrastructure, each of which had strategic effect.

Many of these tactics and technologies had been exhibited in other conflicts for over a decade, most particularly in Ukraine. Yet the U.S. military demonstrated a profound lack of preparation for them, and their doctrinal rigidity and arrogance cost the lives of numerous American soldiers.

The Americans’ failure to adapt is all the more striking because they have an extensive presence in each of these conflicts: military, intelligence, and defense industrial connections to one and sometimes both sides. This illustrates not just the American institutional inertia in adaptation, but also their failure to appreciate and use their relationships with other experienced militaries. The Americans often seemed to operate in a vacuum, as if contemporary lessons of conflict and the experiences and insights of their partners did not even exist.

3: The New Math of War

The adversary fails to comprehend the changing objective laws of modern informationized and increasingly intelligentized warfare, and their connection to the realities of modern defense-industrial supply chains.

The U.S. political and military apparatus boasts of hitting an astounding 13,000 targets. Yet the cost to do so, measured in munitions alone, averaged $4 million apiece.

Their defensive posture suffered from a similar, and fatal, structural cost asymmetry. The Americans routinely engaged mass-produced, low-cost assets, such as $20,000 drones, using multi-million-dollar interceptors designed for high-end fighters and even ballistic missiles.

The American way of war is unsustainable in not just cost but capability. The conflict showed that the adversary’s interceptor inventory is dangerously shallow and exposed. The United States expended an estimated 150 of its THAAD rounds, of which it is believed to have had 190 to 290. At their purchasing rate of 12 new THAAD interceptors per fiscal year, replacing a single month of conflict consumption will require more than 12.5 years of uninterrupted industrial output. Even before the conflict, these numbers were insufficient compared to the capability of the PLARF.

This structural deficit is mirrored across their entire defensive apparatus. The Patriot system rests at a current inventory of 1,060 to 1,430 (against an objective of 2,330); each missile costs $3.9 million. The naval SM-6 is limited to 190 to 370 units (against an objective of 1,160); it costs $5.3 million apiece. The critical SM-3 theater interceptor is restricted to a mere 130 to 250 units (objective: 410), at a prohibitive unit price of $28.7 million.

U.S. leaders, who framed victory by offensive munitions fired, burned through their stockpiles of precision-guided munitions and advanced strike missiles. At current production rates, it will take them until 2030 to restore their pre-war inventory of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

The high expenditure rate is also another facet of their failure to appreciate their now-fraying alliance commitments. For instance, Japan's order of 400 Tomahawks will now be delayed, while Patriot missiles were moved away from defending allies and American bases in the Pacific.

There are two larger takeaways for our strategy from the American inability to keep pace with the appetite of their self-created demands.

First, while they trumpet a revitalized defense industrial base, now driven by social-media-technology oligarchs, their defense industrial complex still remains fundamentally beholden to the forces of short-term market profit rather than comprehensive national power and state resilience. They simply lack the surge production capacity to sustain the high-intensity consumption their way of war requires.

But even more, by forcing their system into an early war of attrition against a secondary power, the Americans have severely compromised their strategic depth and readiness for any future high-intensity confrontation elsewhere, for at least a half decade.

Both points validate the correctness of our Rocket Force’s doctrine of saturated strike capabilities designed to comprehensively paralyze the Americans’ and their client states’ defensive architectures.

4: Self-Inflicted Cognitive Warfare

The conflict reinforced other areas of our theory of victory in any confrontation with America. Most notably, it revealed that the U.S. is uniquely vulnerable to cognitive warfare. In fact, America now appears to specialize in conducting these psychological and information operations against itself.

The rationale behind the Iran conflict remains in great dispute across the American political system and society, with equal confusion and debate about its starting goals and even its termination point. For-profit social-media companies and the American political media apparatus have constructed insulated information bubbles that feed their audiences whatever outcome they most want to be validated by. To different audiences, the conflict is simultaneously a historic triumph and a glaring disaster.

Exacerbating these internal contradictions is a growing preoccupation with domestic culture wars at the expense of coherent strategic execution of real wars. Nor has this phenomenon been mitigated by various attempts at providing a circus of public entertainments that do not seem to be providing either unity or distraction.

In a parallel to the dynamics of U.S alliances, we no longer need to create disunity. While U.S. actions validate our investments in cognitive warfare, they may render them less necessary than when first envisioned, as none of the above was achieved through Iranian or our own cognitive-warfare operations during the recent conflict. The American’s own internal information and ideological fracturing severely degrades their strategic willpower and opens them to further exploitation.

5: Strategic Pressure Points

Nothing highlights this more than what the American political-military-media-entertainment complex chose to celebrate as the war’s greatest triumph: not battles won or geopolitical repositioning, but the rescue of a single pilot.

To review the operational facts, a mythologized, vanguard American asset was easily ambushed and neutralized by Iranian air defenses, which had supposedly already been defeated, in part due to our learning complex. The downed American pilot was then extracted via a massive, exorbitantly expensive rescue operation. A force of 155 aircraft, including 64 fighters, 48 refueling tankers, 13 rescue aircraft, and four nuclear-capable strategic bombers, as well over 100 of the most elite of US special operators were put at risk. Multiple helicopters and drones were then damaged or lost. The fiasco concluded with American forces being compelled to abandon and destroy two of their exorbitantly expensive, rare special-operations aircraft. In a striking display of strategic hubris meeting reality, these $130 million symbols of imperialist intervention ended up hopelessly mired in the mud of Iran.

Unimaginable in our system, the fate of this lone pilot personally occupied the attention of every single member of the American national senior leadership for an entire day. In a world where leader time is the most finite of resources, perhaps this is an even more condemnable use of resources amid a war. This stems from their anxiety that the fate of a single nameless individual would entirely shatter their domestic illusion of absolute military supremacy and determine their nation’s perceptions of overall victory or defeat. Based on their behavior and how their political system operates, they were correct in this judgement.

The recovery of the pilot subsequently extolled by their national media and claimed as a both great and personal victory by President Trump. He claimed the chain of tactical losses, operational waste, and strategic misattention showed the U.S. to have “the best, most professional, and lethal Military in the History of the World.” Extending their cognitive campaign into the long term, it was then announced a few days later that it will be made into a Hollywood movie. It is no coincidence that it will have the same director as the movies Pearl Harbor and 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi, both of which similarly sought to rewrite embarrassing American defeats as stories of heroic success and moral superiority.

The episode is instructive, and not just in how Americans reframed what any other nation would view as a tactical defeat into a strategic and “historic” victory. It illustrates a critical dialectic in American political and military culture. While callous about a conflict that saw thousands killed across the region, they care about their own people to the point of desperation, treating the survival of individual personnel as a metric of absolute strategic value.

To CCP leadership, the situation reveals clear strategic pressure points for future crisis behavior, treatment of allied populations, and likelihood of accepting high-intensity conflict. For PLA operational planning, the adversary's extreme aversion to casualties and their obsession with personnel recovery can be easily weaponized, so as to paralyze their tactical, theater-level, and national command decision-making. It can also be a means to deter or draw out and destroy high-value enemy assets.

CONCLUSION

The results of the American conflict against Iran do not mean that we would inevitably win a war against them. But they do demonstrate that we are winning the war for the future itself.

==============

Addendum: After this memo was reprinted in the American media, Pentagon leadership issued a response:

"This memo supposedly from Beijing is exactly the kind of over-intellectualized, administrative trash we are actively scrubbing out of the Department of War. Some armchair theorist wants to lecture us on 'the dialectic' and 'cognitive traps' while his own state-controlled echo chamber ignores reality. Let me make one thing crystal clear to the communists in Beijing: we do not measure the success of an American combat operation by spreadsheet metrics or the profit margins of globalist supply chains. We decimated 13,000 threats, neutralized their command nodes, and we did it with the most lethal, unapologetic display of raw power the world has seen in a generation.

"The bean-counters trying to use inventory arithmetic as an excuse for strategic timidity are fundamentally miscalculating how a superpower fights and wins. We did this from a position of absolute strength, leading with unmatched military might. Any suggestion that our defense industrial base is too fragile to sustain high-intensity operations is unhelpful, foolishly overstated, and fails to appreciate the sheer, adaptive scale of American manufacturing when it is fully unleashed.

"If anyone thinks he found a 'strategic pressure point' because we executed a massive, high-risk mission to rescue our downed pilots, he is a fool. He calls it a weakness that we blew up our own gear to protect our people. That isn’t a flaw—that is the sacred bond of the American warrior ethos, and it’s something a communist bureaucrat who views his own soldiers as expendable state property will never understand. We will spend whatever it takes, fire whatever interceptor is required, and push forward with absolutely no quarter and no mercy to bring our boys home.

"As for his pathetic attempt to lecture us on internal 'culture wars,' he's late to the punch. The days of a woke, risk-averse Pentagon distracted by bureaucratic summits and diversity seminars are over; under this administration, we have systematically re-centered our entire military apparatus around a singular, deadly purpose: winning wars. While China and its buddies in Russia try to build an 'authoritarian learning bloc' out of cheap, attritable drones, they are fundamentally miscalculating the sleeping giant they are poking. We are rebuilding our defense industrial stockpiles with pure, unadulterated American manufacturing scale. Beijing can keep writing its comfortable memos and analyzing our internal politics all they want, but the moment they try to step into the breach, they will find out exactly what happens when the full, unfiltered power of the American war machine, led by our greatest President, is unleashed on them."

]]>

Could the Army’s light squad vehicle power battlefield drones?

Lauren C. Williams — Fri, 26 Jun 2026 16:59:14 -0400

The Army’s proliferating drone use is exacerbating the modern problem of keeping everything charged. One combat team is testing ways to use its light Infantry Squad Vehicles as mobile charging stations.

“As we field technology, power generation becomes increasingly problematic. The [Integrated Tactical Network], all the soldier-borne equipment, all require batteries that have to be recharged. [Enhanced Night Vision Goggles] require batteries, particularly to use thermals,” said Col. Ryan Bell, commander of the 3rd Mobile Brigade Combat Team in the 101st Airborne Division, of lessons from an April training rotation at the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Polk, Louisiana.

Finding ways to boost battery power on the battlefield—and learning how long new tech lasts in different conditions—is a persistent problem for the military.

“As we add drones…the [Short Range Reconnaissance], the [Medium-Range Reconnaissance], they all have to be charged,” Bell told reporters Thursday.

So the unit equipped its ISVs with inverters, similar to the kind of thing any car owner might plug into the outlet formerly known as a cigarette lighter to get standard 120V power.

“Every squad functionally had their own generator without having to tow a trailer, or a generator, behind it,” Bell said.

But more power is needed, he said, like hybrid generators that could deliver up to 10 kilowatts, depending on a unit’s needs.

Bell suggested sizing the generators so they can be mounted on the five-seater ISV-Utility variant the Army plans to field. They could also be towed, but that’s not a great solution for rough terrain.

The Senate’s version of the 2027 defense policy bill would greenlight multiyear procurement of the ISVs if adopted in the final version.

“As future ISVs are fielded, we need to ensure they are utilized as power generation platforms, particularly for our squads. Our use of the vehicle as a sustainment platform by adding commercial off-the-shelf racks on the back was very helpful,” Bell said.

“We are also excited to get the ISV-U, which will give us more utility lift capacity. Having a single, common platform across the formation will simplify our logistics chain. The utility variant will be extremely helpful for mission command and power generation for our command posts.”

Bell also said troops also need batteries that carry more charge and last longer, which would “reduce the number of batteries you have to charge and have to carry, because solder load is a real thing.”

]]>

House, mostly, backs $1.5B White House moves to fund E-7 Wedgetail

Thomas Novelly — Thu, 25 Jun 2026 20:06:49 -0400

House appropriators supported a $1.5 billion White House budget request to back E-7 Wedgetail development, but pushed back on an attempt to raid the Navy’s airborne early warning account to partially fund the Air Force’s next-generation radar plane.

In a letter last week, Russell Vought, the Office of Management and Budget director, detailed the E-7 shuffle to House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. The Pentagon suggested pulling $651 million from the Navy’s E-2 procurement account and $899 million from the Air Force’s classified special update programs. While House appropriators backed the full E-7 funding in their version of the annual defense spending bill on Wednesday, they also restored the money to the Navy’s coffers.

“While the [Appropriations] Committee wholly supports the E–7 program and funding realignment, the Committee also restored the E–2D program to six aircraft for fiscal year 2027,” lawmakers wrote in their report. “The Committee understands the operational necessity of the E–2D platform; the complementary nature of the E–2D and E–7; and believes that more aircraft, not fewer, are necessary to support our warfighters now and in the future.”

An Air Force spokesperson declined to comment on the programs affected by the shuffle.

Airpower advocates have intensified their push for E-7 funding and battlespace awareness upgrades since an Air Force E-3 Sentry airborne warning and control aircraft was damaged in March during the war in Iran. While the Pentagon omitted the Wedgetail its 2027 budget requests, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth reversed course and told lawmakers last month that the next-generation replacement is needed for future conflicts.

Given the dwindling E-3 fleet, appropriators said the military’s reliance on airborne battle management aircraft means more investment is needed in a next-generation replacement.

“The conflict in Iran has reinforced the need for the Air Force to maintain a credible airborne battle management capability, currently being met with the Air Force’s E–3 Airborne Warning and Control System and the Navy’s E–2D Hawkeye programs,” lawmakers wrote. “As the E–3 is set to retire, the E–7 Wedgetail will serve as [a] modern replacement for lost battle management capability, commensurate and interoperable with assets already being utilized by key allies.”

Lawmakers also ordered Air Force Secretary Troy Meink to brief the House and Senate defense appropriation subcommittees “on the full E–7 acquisition strategy, to include required quantity; funding requirements across the future years defense program; and schedules for development and production” by the time the 2028 budget request is submitted.

One expert said having the White House, Pentagon, and Congress on the same page, bodes well for the program.

“I believe the likelihood of the program getting off to a great start is very, very high,” said Mark Gunzinger, the Mitchell Institute’s director of future concepts and capability assessments. He added that any shuffling of funds within the service’s accounts “will hurt programs.”

]]>

Defense Business Brief: SECARMY’s dream marketplace; USARPAC + USVs; and Quantum EOs

Lauren C. Williams — Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:00:00 -0400

ARLINGTON, Va.—From rockets to tanks, the Army wants to expand its current Amazon-esque marketplace where soldiers, allies and partners now buy drones and counter-UAS tech.

“The grand strategy of conflict going forward is compatibility,” Army Secretary Dan Driscoll told reporters Tuesday during the Army’s industry day for low-cost interceptors. “The way that small nations like Finland are going to be able to partner with large nations like the United States, and we are going to be able to parachute into a theater where a lot of our stuff doesn't exist, is that our allies have compatible equipment to us.”

To do that, everyone needs to have the right “plumbing” for information-sharing, “and then—in theory, in a perfect world, you want everyone buying from the same places. They don't have to buy the same thing, but they want to buy that compatible stuff,” Driscoll said. “We're functioning almost like Consumer Reports, where we are reviewing many of the products on there, we're allowing other countries to put their reviews on there, and then…just let free market forces dictate what are the best products.”

The service already has dedicated marketplaces for cUAS and aerial drones and, last week, inked a deal with NATO allies and partners to use the platforms. Nine partner countries signed a letter of intent at the Eurosatory conference: Denmark, Finland, France, Italy, Lithuania, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, and the United Kingdom, the Army confirmed to Defense One. They join the eight nations already signed on: Australia, Argentina, Estonia, Poland, Romania, Singapore, South Korea, and Thailand.

The unmanned aerial system marketplace has approximately 45 companies represented and more than $200 million in sales, said Brent Ingraham, the Army’s acquisition chief. It’s also generating sales from allies and partners.

The ultimate goal is to have just one platform with virtually all Army materiel available. And when a soldier places an order, it goes directly to the vendor within 24 hours.

“We're merging the marketplaces together,” Ingraham told reporters. “When a soldier goes in and says: I want to buy 110, 300 of some product on this on the current UAS or counter-UAS marketplace, that automatically kicks directly over to an order that flows to that company.”

Driscoll described a future, broader digital marketplace as something that could reshape how the military positions materiel abroad vis-à-vis prepositioned stock: “It's kind of a rewriting of how we, the United States, can engage in conflict abroad.”

And perhaps, one day, low-cost interceptors could be a part of that marketplace. The Army plans to release an RFI for low-cost interceptors July 6 with a four-week window for submissions, and the goal of having tech demonstrations by the first quarter of fiscal year 2027.

Welcome

USARPAC + drone boats. Gen. Ronald Clark, commander of U.S. Army Pacific, is all about using unmanned systems for logistics and sustainment. But the key is working with companies that can build what the command needs.

The Army primarily uses watercraft for sustainment, which is something unmanned surface vessels could help with “at range and scale,” Clark told reporters.
“We're not there yet, but again, we're working with a number of companies to try to get them to build to the requirements we need to assist us with the business of logistics and sustainment on behalf of the joint force across the Pacific. So [there’s] a lot of opportunity associated with unmanned and uncrewed systems.”
When it comes to numbers and size of the USVs, Clark said he is open—as long as it gets the job done.
“I got asked a question at the Pacific Forum by a vendor, if I would rather have one 200-foot autonomous system or 20 10-foot autonomous systems—and I said both.”
“The bottom line is: we have to be able to provide logistics and sustainment at scale. And as the theater Army, our responsibility to provide resiliency to the joint force through logistics and sustainment is part of our mission” and the service is “working directly with companies to try to build what we need in order to meet the requirements to be able to conduct both inter and intra-theater logistics.”

All quantum everything. The Pentagon released its “Post Quantum Cryptography Strategy” Tuesday, following the signing of two White House executive orders designed to speed up development of quantum computing.

Those orders charge the department with identifying at least three new quantum sensors in the next 60 days, which would then be fielded by September 2028.
But while the Pentagon’s strategy says it “will update, replace, or remove from use edge systems” with quantum-vulnerable cryptography, modernization “is only a first step,” Kirsten Davies, the department’s chief information officer, said Wednesday at a SAP event in Washington, D.C. “It's important, but it's only a first step.”
All in all, the moves have spurred much excitement from the quantum industry:
"America’s quantum moment is arriving," Victor Peng, CEO at PsiQuantum said in a statement to Defense One.
Sristy Agrawal, Mesa Quantum co-founder and CEO, said U.S. tech dominance “relies on quantum, from computing to sensing” and the executive orders ensure “the domestic quantum ecosystem will continue to grow and flourish.”
Background: Quantum computing promises the ability to solve problems and make calculations that modern binary computers can’t handle, which could mean discovering new materials or compounds, and breaking the encryption used to safeguard state secrets and financial data.
But while the tech still needs to be proven, the EOs make it the last piece in a trifecta—alongside AI and semiconductors—for the future of compute. Get the whole story from Nextgov’s Alexandra Kelley here.

Making moves + other news

The Pentagon announced plans for a 90-day assessment of its research labs and development centers.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., raised ethics concerns with the Trump administration’s nominee to lead space acquisition, Erich Hernandez-Baquero, Raytheon’s vice president for space intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.
Rune snagged a $99 million contract with the Army for predictive logistics.
The Marine Corps ordered more than 70 of Polaris’ MRZR Alphas as part of the Ultra-Light Tactical Vehicle, or ULTV, contract.
Robert Neller, the former Marine Corps commandant, joins critical minerals company Mint Innovation as a strategic advisor.
The Defense Logistics Agency awarded eVAC Magnetics $13 million to manufacture domestic rare-earth magnets.
Robert Geckle will be the new CEO for Thales’s North American business on July 1. Geckle was previously the CEO of Airbus U.S. Space & Defense.
Booz Allen plans to acquire the defense tech company Ultra Mission Solutions for $720 million.

]]>

RIMPAC kicks off in Hawaii with a focus on experimentation

Jennifer Hlad — Thu, 25 Jun 2026 04:07:20 -0400

JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, Hawaii—The 30th iteration of RIMPAC will feature 30 to 35 experiments that involve unmanned systems, the Pacific Fleet’s second-in-command said Wednesday.

The experiments are “a major part” of this year’s edition of the biennial Exercise Rim of the Pacific, Vice Adm. Jeffrey Jablon told reporters at a press conference. He declined to provide specifics.

Along with the drones, RIMPAC also includes 30 countries, 31 surface ships, five submarines, and nearly 200 aircraft, Jablon said. While the theme is “partners: integrated and prepared,” he said his top priorities for each of the 30,000 participants are “safety, environmental stewardship, and professionalism.”

Though deterring China while getting ready to defend against a potential attack is a major focus for U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, Jablon said RIMPAC “is not about any one particular country or a deterrent for any one particular country.”

And the war with Iran “had no impact” on RIMPAC, Jablon said. “The United States is contributing the same number of forces that we normally contribute.”

Jablon is serving as the commander of the combined task force for RIMPAC. Underscoring the partnership aspect of the exercise, the deputy commander is a Chilean navy officer, the vice commander is a Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force officer, the maritime component commander is a Korean navy officer, and the air component commander is a Royal Canadian Navy officer.

The exercise will end with the sinking of two decommissioned U.S. Navy ships.

]]>

ODNI deputy director pushed out amid Pulte shakeup

David DiMolfetta — Wed, 24 Jun 2026 22:00:00 -0400

Will Ruger, the deputy director of national intelligence for mission integration, was placed on administrative leave as part of a broader personnel shakeup at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence that has removed roughly 50 career and political staffers from their roles since Bill Pulte became acting director Friday, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Around 15 to 20 mission integration personnel detailed to ODNI from other U.S. intelligence units are believed to have been sent back to their home agencies, added the person, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to communicate the personnel shifts.

The removals could have practical consequences because mission integration is one of the main offices ODNI uses to link work across the intelligence landscape. The directorate is responsible for coordinating the 18 agencies that make up the U.S. intelligence community and helping ensure they perform as a unified enterprise. The unit also advises the director of national intelligence on how findings are collected, analyzed and used to inform policy and operational decisions.

CBS News first reported details of Ruger’s dismissal. The estimated number of mission integration staff moved back to their home agencies has not been previously reported.

The moves have occurred under the broader shakeup at ODNI since Pulte took over as acting director after former Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard left the role. Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said Wednesday that Pulte had told him roughly 45 to 50 career officers were being sent back to their home agencies, while a smaller number of front-office personnel were leaving federal service altogether.

Many ODNI employees serve on joint duty assignments, temporary postings that bring personnel from other intelligence agencies into the director’s office.

ODNI has not returned requests for comment about the downsizing plans.

Pulte’s early moves come as Jay Clayton, Trump’s nominee to serve as the Senate-confirmed intelligence chief, awaits Senate consideration, though the president ordered the cancellation of Clayton’s hearing last week until the Senate could confirm the new U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, who would be Clayton’s replacement.

Democrats warned that Pulte’s role in the president’s mortgage fraud reviews last year could foreshadow an abuse of intelligence tools to target the president’s political opponents, leading to the historic lapse of a key surveillance authority earlier this month.

Confirming Clayton would have helped reshore support from key Democrats for the surveillance power. But Trump also asserted that the spying authority — Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act — should not pass without the concurrent passage of a controversial voter identification bill that doesn’t have enough support in Congress.

Cotton said Wednesday that Pulte broadly agrees with returning ODNI to its “original size, scope and mission,” including by spinning off some functional centers and sending detailed officers back to their home agencies.

The downsizing push began under Gabbard, whose office had announced plans to cut roughly 40% of ODNI’s workforce and said the effort was a streamlining measure that would save more than $700 million annually.

Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees warned Pulte this week against making major changes while serving in an acting capacity, arguing that large-scale personnel moves and other consequential decisions should be left to a Senate-confirmed director.

]]>