From the National Counterterrorism Center, a new travel guide

~ Matt Armstrong ~ 1 Comment

Actually, it’s more of a counter-travel guide for counter-terrorism. The NCTC recently published a document – National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel (note the document name in the link) – that “proposes specific actions aimed at strengthening our efforts at home and abroad to constrain terrorist mobility.”

The document’s filename, “Terrorist Travel Book”, brought to mind Calvin Trillin, who authored A Heckuva Job: More of the Bush Administration in Rhyme. Calvin was on the Jon Stewart show and his very dry wit was classic:

“I think the whole shoe bomber thing was a prank… the guy was an obvious bozo… he practically asked the flight attendant for a match… as I see it, there is one Arab terrorist with a sense of humor, known in his cell as Khalid the Drool. He said, “I bet I can get them all to take their shoes off in airports. Some people disagree with me, but, if the next one is called… the Underwear Bomber, you’ll know I’m on to something.”

Back to the handbook. This document seems to a) restate the obvious, b) rely on technical means, c) sees the value of multilateralism, d) and focuses on law enforcement and police mechanisms over military interdiction.

The document’s emphasis on fixing problems, such as human trafficking, focus on “terrorist” use and not the whole channel. This is short-sighted and fails to acknowledge that allowing this criminal behavior allows the conduit to function.

The need for a comprehensive and inclusive multilateral strategy is evident in the closing of this document:

We seek to deny safe harbor to terrorists wherever they are or seek to move. This strategy demonstrates the resolve of the US Government to strengthen international and US travel systems and make them as inhospitable as possible to our terrorist enemies. Building on the progress we have made in the years since 9/11, we will see continuing successes in constraining terrorist movements and in fortifying the will of the international community to devote increased attention and resources to this critical front in the War on Terror.

The reality and the expressed position of other documents, chiefly the National Security Strategy, state something far less than this “fortifying the will of the international community”. The NSS states we will operate independently when required:

The second pillar of our strategy is confronting the challenges of our time by leading a growing community of democracies. Many of the problems we face – from the threat of pandemic disease, to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to terrorism, to human trafficking, to natural disasters – reach across borders. Effective multinational efforts are essential to solve these problems. Yet history has shown that only when we do our part will others do theirs. America must continue to lead.

The “terrorist travel book” is more understanding of the need to collaborate. It’s sensible, really. To build detection systems, technical or human, you need everybody working together. If we look at the role of public diplomacy as a tool to facilitate macro agreements, understandings, and the desire for protection as the “terrorist travel book” describes as the micro level (restricting individuals is rather granular), there is a huge disconnect. American public diplomacy programs lack fundamental requisites of “public diplomacy” as critical report after critical report describes.

An interesting and quick read.

Lastly, if there is a micro level and a macro level, there must be a meso level….

National means “state” or “federal”?

~ Matt Armstrong

The Armchair Generalist has a good post on the building issue of who ‘owns’ the National guard. With deeper and broader dependency on NG troops for homeland defense and similar deep and broad dependency with regular forces overseas, who is paying (economically & socially) for these troops? Definitely an issue that is not discussed enough.

Question: the National Guard is the citizens’ militia, right? Others might argue the Michigan Militia or others are the true citizens’ militia, and they may be more ‘right’ today with the functional federalization of the NG. However, as these paramilitary groups border on or go beyond the illegal, firms like Cochise, Blackwater, ArmorGroup, and others form the real citizens’ militia as their requirements include lower barriers for participation (we’re not talking just shooters here). These other roles, which A Bloody Business chose to focus on, provide the real Lockean choice to the citizenry. Isn’t this part of re-democratizing the role of the warrior?

Nigeria and Islam, two brief facts

~ Matt Armstrong

Did you know that Nigeria has a rich and long history of Islam extending 1,200 years. Slightly more than half of the country is Muslim, the other half is Christian, making it the largest Islamo-Christian country in the world. There are more Muslims in Nigeria than Afghanistan, Iraq, Sudan, and all of the Gulf countries combined.

Quick post: ONR and Science Diplomacy, Nagl and COIN

~ Matt Armstrong

I’m having some connectivity issues while in DC so posting yesterday’s event will be later today or even tonight along with a report on today’s events.

Briefly on yesterday, interesting conference sessions with on Science and Technology for expeditionary warfare, assymetric warfare, sea warfare, etc. (see the right side of the ONR page for topics yesterday). Some reporting on this will appear here later.

Also had an opportunity for a 20min interview with the Commanding Officer for ONR-Global which was surprisingly (to me) an excellent example of public diplomacy (better name: science diplomacy) in action. This 20min meeting went 60 minutes when I had to leave, and already late for, John Nagl’s presentation on Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife, as part of the Rethinking seminar series. Good information came from that in the Q&A, including a question about private security companies, and from sharing a cold beer with John and others after the seminar.

More to come later.

“Where’s My Blue Helmet?” Wherever it is, the people (and their bosses) wearing it are likely getting paid by SC

~ Matt Armstrong

From Slate is this article: Where’s My Blue Helmet? How to become a UN Peacekeeper. (Thanks to David Isenberg for sending this out.)

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice discussed the possibility of a cease-fire with Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora on Monday. Rice proposed using international peacekeepers throughout the country and to guard its borders with Israel and Syria. Siniora said he would consider a deployment of peacekeepers, but only if they came from the United Nations. Who are the U.N. peacekeepers, and where do they come from?They’re soldiers, police officers, and military observers from the United Nations’ member countries. Nations are expected to volunteer the members of their armed forces when askedin general, the developing world does most of the volunteering . As of last month, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and India each had almost 10,000 troops in blue helmets, while American soldiers accounted for just 12.The contributing countries continue to pay their soldiers, but they get reimbursed by the United Nations at a standard rate of $1,028 per month, plus a few hundred dollars extra for specialists. Troops typically stay for at least six months at a time, with the exact details of the deployment schedule left up to the country that sent them.

Continue reading ““Where’s My Blue Helmet?” Wherever it is, the people (and their bosses) wearing it are likely getting paid by SC
“ →

Day One At the Naval S&T Conference 2006

~ Matt Armstrong

This week is the 2006 Naval Science and Technology Partnership Conference at the Wardman Park Marriot in Washington, D.C. This conference is put on by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA), in partnership and with technical support from the Office of Naval Research (ONR). The conference’s slogan should give you an idea of the topics to be covered over the next four days: “The Navy After Next… Powered by Naval Research”.

Continue reading “Day One At the Naval S&T Conference 2006
“ →

Unmanned Warfare news blast

~ Matt Armstrong

The category “Unmanned Warfare” on this site is intended to highlight and comment on unmanned & remote warfare. In this context, I will use unmanned vehicles to refer to the collective aerial, ground, and naval vehicles (and vessels). This is better than writing all the acronyms. These may be not, semi-, or full-autonomous. They may be controlled on the battlefield or on the homeland by a civilian or a soldier.

UAV- Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (news here)

UGV- Unmanned Ground Vehicle (info here)

UUV- Unmanned Underwater Vehicle

USV- Unmanned Surface Vehicle

News on both UUV/USV available here

Reports on:

Unmanned Aircraft Systems Roadmap 2005-2030 from Office of SecDef Aug 2005

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and Uninhabited Combat Aerial Vehicles, Defense Science Board, February 2004

Blog:

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

The pace of unmanned vehicles, increasing sensors and even increasing autonomy will have a visible impact in the near future on the conduct of war. Just as private military companies affect foreign policy, military effectiveness, and national images through intended and unintended means, unmanned or remotely manned vehicles will alter policy. Perhaps PMC use is a foreshadowing of the mass deployment of unmanned vehicles. I suggest that decision-making modeling for the AI of semi- and full-autonomous unmanned vehicles be based on private security contractor decision-making. Eliminating the outliers of national fanaticism and opportunist mercenary, in the middle we have a skilled operator professionally and wholly committed to the job. However, this operator (as the older veteran, likely with a family) will avoid suicide missions, will have different cost-benefit analysis to live another day.

In the deployment of unmanned vehicles, what are we to expect? There are some hints today, including failures to communicate (including between robot and personnel… hopefully not too reminiscent of RoboCop). What about the Laws of War when an unmanned vehicle, “driven” by a civilian on the battlefield, in the US, or even sitting in an allied country kills a US soldier, a civilian, IGO/NGO personnel, or an allied soldier?

With that, here is a blast of unmanned vehicle news, mostly from the UAV blog, but not all:

  • Boeing to Perform Front-Line UAV Support for USMC, Navy
    Boeing contractor support personnel… have been involved in front-line support for their Scaneagle UAVs for some time now, and those UAVs have proven useful in campaigns like Fallujah and al-Anbar, operating from forward-deployed land locations and even from onboard high-speed ships.
  • UAVs get smaller: the Micro Air Vehicle nears readiness
    As each new conflict redefines war based on the technologies coming of age at that time, the Iraq campaign has seen the coming of age of the UAV in its many wonderous forms. It is the most-requested capability among combatant commanders and in the last 18 months, UAV numbers in Iraq have jumped from fewer than 100 to more than 400 and there are now nearly 600 UAVs in the Afghanistan and Iraq theatres. Even more interesting is the dizzying array of unmanned aircraft used in traditional intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance UAV roles.
  • Israeli UAV Fires Upon Own Troops
    The IAF revealed on Tuesday that it had prevented a severe disaster on the previous day when it had halted the fire that a UAV was shooting at Israeli troops.
  • Unexpected Consequences of UAVs
    ‘While the U.S. Army has come to use its growing number of UAVs with great success, there have been negatives as well. For one thing, there are so many UAVs in the air, that the U.S. Air Force, which manages use of air space for all three services, has sometimes declared that even the smallest UAVs have to file flight plans. This usually means planning your UAV use 24 hours in advance. Ground combat commanders do not always have the luxury of 24 hours notice, and often find themselves calling for army helicopters or air force jets, already in the air, to please stop by and give them some top-down views of a ground battle in progress. These restrictions tend to be in effect only in busy areas like metropolitan Baghdad.’
  • UAV Planes’ tiny brains could save lives in war
    The brains of the Mosquito, as with all unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), is a tiny electronic circuit board called an autopilot that controls the flight and the camera. The Mosquito’s autopilot comes from Winnipeg-based MicroPilot Inc., a leader in a suddenly hot market.
  • Drone aircraft may prowl U.S. skies
    A House of Representatives panel on Wednesday (March 2006) heard testimony from police agencies that envision using UAVs for everything from border security to domestic surveillance high above American cities. Private companies also hope to use UAVs for tasks such as aerial photography and pipeline monitoring.

More to come later.

Related to unmanned vehicles is unmanned warfare, the title of this category. Below are is remote sensing link:

  • Mini-Sensors for "Military Omniscience"
    Spotting insurgents, sorting out friend from foe – it’s beyond tough in today’s guerilla war zones. So tough, that no single monitor can be counted on to handle the job. The Pentagon’s answer: build a set of palm-sized, networked sensors that can be scattered around, and work together to “detect, classify, localize, and track dismounted combatants under foliage and in urban environments.” It’s part of a larger Defense Department effort to establish “military omniscience” and “ubiquitous monitoring.”

Sport as Diplomacy? USA Swimming says absolutely

~ Matt Armstrong ~ 1 Comment

Many recognize sport as a form of public and cultural diplomacy. While some sports do not do well crossing America’s borders either outward (American Football) or inward (Football according to the rest of the world), swimming does. The worldwide reach of swimming is immediately evident at any Olympic Games, let alone the numerous other regional championship games held around the world. Remember the African athlete finishing the swim the 100m at the Sydney Olympics who had never swam that distance at once or in anything other than a hotel pool before.

The sport also crosses age barriers allowing athletes to continue to train and compete into their nineties as one National (or World?) champion 500yd swimmer proved recently (at a pace I know many people a fourth his age couldn’t). In short, it is one of the widest reaching sports, not as far as soccer, but with tremendous visibility and a huge national and international following around the globe.

With this in mind, Chuck Wieglus, Executive Director for USA Swimming, published an open letter to the National Team athletes, coaches, staff, board of directors of USA Swimming, and others within the US Olympic establishment. To be sure, this open letter shows a clear awareness of the value of swimming to highlight America and to raise awareness of the intense media spotlight that will be the Beijing Olympics.

Below is the full letter, also available here. 

Dear National Team Athletes:

As I watched the Winter Olympic Games and observed some of the more unfortunate incidents and reports that came out of Torino I reflected on just how special the performances of USA Swimming athletes have been over the years. You and your predecessors won 28 medals at the 2004 Athens Olympic Games, 33 medals at the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games, and equally impressive numbers in all preceding Olympic Games.  It is no surprise then that USA Swimming has been the world’s #1 ranked international swim team for so many years. These Olympic performance results are even more impressive when considered in the context of growing worldwide competition in our sport.  Today there are more than 190 member federations in FINA and winning Olympic medals is only going to get tougher in the future.

But there’s more than a medal-winning history to give you reason to be proud.  Of equal – and perhaps even greater importance – is the manner in which USA Swimming athletes have represented their country. U.S. swimmers have consistently reflected everything that most people think is good about American youth.  Beyond being prepared for optimum physical success, U.S. swimmers have presented themselves in a way that has reflected enthusiasm, humility, maturity, sincerity, team spirit and patriotism. 

For USA Swimming, the notion of team spirit is especially important.  While many may view swimming as an individual sport, USA Swimming has always gone into international competition as a TEAM.  Our coaches have continually stressed the importance of the team concept, and there is a true belief that when we act and function like a team we maximize the potential for greater performance results.  Supporting each other as teammates, no matter what the sport, is something that the average fan notices and appreciates.  Michael Phelps may have endeared himself to more American television viewers for the race he didn’t swim in Athens than for any of the six gold medals that he won.  When Michael gave up his relay team spot so that Ian Crocker could swim he showed he cared as much about a teammate as he did about himself.  And when the television cameras caught him leading his U.S. teammates in cheering for that relay team, Michael won hearts throughout the world. 

As harsh as the media spotlight may have been in Torino, it will burn even hotter at the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games.  The media coverage in Beijing will dwarf that of any sporting event ever held.  Television cameras will capture every movement and microphones will record every word.  An off-hand comment, a surly facial expression, any negative body language will become fodder for a reporter’s negative story.  As good as we have been in the past about conveying positive images, we are going to have to be even better in the future. 

Following Torino, the press is going to be watching very closely to see how U.S. athletes behave.  It is now going to be more important than ever that you and your teammates commit yourselves to protecting the overwhelmingly positive image and reputation that has been the hallmark of American swimmers in the past.  You are representing not only yourself, but your family, your sport and your country and this should be a responsibility that you embrace with careful thought and sincerity.

The USOC has announced its intent to address athlete behavior more seriously in the future.  I ask you to join together with your teammates, coaches and others in the “swimming family” to lead the way.  As we prepare for the Beijing Olympic Games,  let’s include in our preparations a commitment to considering how we can best represent our sport and our country.  At a time when so many people in the rest of the world seem to dislike – or even hate – Americans, let’s use our participation in international competition as an opportunity to change attitudes.  Put bluntly, our objectives for Beijing should be twofold:

1.      To win medals!

2.      To win friends for the U.S. by the manner in which we conduct ourselves individually and as a team!

If you accomplish both of these objectives, I can assure you that not only will many awards and accolades be heaped upon you, but that you will have done something extraordinary that will be with you for the rest of your life.  Challenging times provide enormous opportunities.  You would not be a member of the USA Swimming National Team if you were afraid of tough challenges.  That challenge is now even greater and I encourage you to embrace it!

Go USA!

Chuck Wielgus Executive Director USA Swimming

What is “War”? Some definitions

~ Matt Armstrong ~ 2 Comments

In the challenge to understand “war”, here are some definitions. This is the first of two or three posts on listing definitions. One must understand anything in order to build an appropriate response, of course. This is true in the medical field as it is in politics and in conflict. On my desk are two books that I’m going through this week. The first is Colonel Callwell’s 1906 Small Wars and the second is Ahmed Hashim’s Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency in Iraq, both of which are excellent so far and will be reviewed later (currently I’d say get them and get them now). On to the definitions:

War as an Act of Violence

  • “War is a violent contact of distinct but similar entities” – Quincy Wright, A Study of War, 1942
  • “War is an act of violence intended to compel our opponents to fulfill our will…” – Clausewitz, On War
  • “War is a contest or contention carried on by force” – Cicero
  • “War is that state in which men constantly exercise acts of indeterminate violence against each other.” – Martens, Precis du Droit des Gens, 1788

War as an Absence of Peace

  • “… the death of the insured on board the Lusitania must be conceded to be a result of war.” – Vanderbilt v Travelers Insurance Co., New York Supreme Court, 1920
  • “War is nothing but a continuation of political intercourse, with a mixture of other means.” – Clausewitz, On War
  • “War hath no fury like a non-combatant.” – Charles Edward Montague, Disenchantment, 1922
  • “The State of War is a State of Enmity and Destruction: And therefore declaring by Word or Action, not a passionate and hasty, but a sedate settled Design, upon another Mans Life, puts him in a State of War with him whom he has declared such an Intention, and so has exposed his Life to the Others Power to be taken away by his…” – Locke, Two Treatises of Government, 1690

UPDATE: MSNBC response to White House linkage to AQ

~ Matt Armstrong

It is good to see the mainstream media picking on the senseless and misleading linkages the Bush Administration is making in the Middle East.

Reading "Fiasco," Thomas Ricks’s devastating new book about the Iraq war, brought back memories for me. Memories of going on night raids in Samarra in January 2004, in the heart of the Sunni Triangle, with the Fourth Infantry Division units that Ricks describes. During these raids, confused young Americans would burst into Iraqi homes, overturn beds, dump out drawers, and summarily arrest all military-age men—actions that made them unwitting recruits for the insurgency. For American soldiers battling the resistance throughout Iraq, the unspoken rule was that all Iraqis were guilty until proven innocent. Arrests, beatings and sometimes killings were arbitrary, often based on the flimsiest intelligence, and Iraqis had no recourse whatever to justice. Imagine the sense of helpless rage that emerges from this sort of treatment. Apply three years of it and you have one furious, traumatized population. And a country out of control.

The entire article, which is yet another not-so-disguised review of Ricks’ FIASCO, is certainly worthwhile. Although it is somewhat disappointing this review is a "web exclusive", making me wonder how or if the broadcast coverage & magazine may be influenced by this.

UPDATE: as I come across or hear about critiques about this MSNBC article, Ricks’ book ("another Monday morning quarterback"), and moral problems I feel it is important to understand the contemporary situation as events unfold. A book (to be reviewed here in the not too distant future) that is worth looking at for this is Ahmed Hashim’s Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency in Iraq. Hashim, a Professor of Strategic Studies at the US Naval War College, has what is surely a more technical and detailed description of the cause and effect merry go-round based on what I’ve read of Ricks (reviews and his news piece) and his target audience and the to-date brief reading of Hashim’s book.

Landis & a positive test?

~ Matt Armstrong

Eurosport.com and others are reporting:

Tour de France winner Floyd Landis has given a positive drugs test for the male sex hormone testosterone, his Phonak team said on Thursday.

Hopefully the B sample doesn’t agree with the test of the A sample, or there is a valid explanation (I have no idea what that scenario could be). Argh.

DC, Nagl, Galula, and the new Army COIN manual

~ Matt Armstrong

I didn’t mention that when I’m in DC next week for the 2006 Naval S&T Partnership Conference, I will be also sitting in on “Rethinking the Future Nature of Competitions and Conflict” seminar sponsored with LTC John Nagl, author of the excellent book Learning to Eat Soup with a Knife (I recommend getting the revised / updated edition). This excellent series – of which the audio, video and presentation are generally available for download – is co-sponsored by the Department of Defense’s Office of Force Transformation and the Office of the Secretary of the Navy.

Continue reading “DC, Nagl, Galula, and the new Army COIN manual
“ →

Book Review: A Bloody Business: America’s War Zone Contractors and the Occupation of Iraq

~ Matt Armstrong ~ 2 Comments

An element of private military companies is the rediscovered opportunity to join “the fight” without joining a public military organization. Reasons for taking the private route include being too old, too unfit, short-term goals (i.e. quick money, <1yr commitment, the experience, etc), flexibility of choice, or any number of other reasons. The fact is private military companies providing security, logistics, and other services in and around the modern battlespace is re-democratizing war.

Looking at the private military industry operating in Iraq, in A Bloody Business Colonel Schumacher reviews many of its varied components beyond the almost cliche private security details (the shooters). From construction to trucking to training and even the security contractors, the author profiles elements of the private military industry as under-appreciated, undervalued, and, in many of his examples, highly patriotic.

This is a book heavy on cheerleading for the private contractors as individuals without spending too much time on the question of the appropriateness of the industry. These men and women do not get the same insurance, logistic support, fire support, medical support, or equipment the public armed forces receive. In return, they get the opportunity to serve at their leisure, higher pay, and little recognition. This book attempts to correct the latter as “[n]either a glorification nor a cheap shot-riddled exposé”, as the back of the dust cover describes it.

Indeed, most of the reviews on Amazon and other sites echo this sentiment: “…the incredible amount of dangers they face, often times it is more than money which motivates them. For the majority of the contractors, it is their chance to serve their country” and “[t]hey are no less patriotic, no less courageous, than people in the military.”

Colonel Schumacher glosses over the issues behind the tremendous increase in using private military companies in the last decade. He largely attributes the availability of skilled security resources as a result of “Up-or-Out” policies, but this is a narrow reading of reality. There is more there than that, especially military downsizing etc but like most of the political arguments, Schumacher oversimplifies to spend less time on the intellectual analysis (and long-term realities) and more on the daily realities of the contractor.

Interesting is his observation of the multicultural and multiethnic make up of PMCs, which reminded me of the democratic and ethnically blind pirates of the 17th Century as described in Benerson Little’s excellent book, The Sea Rover’s Practice (reviewed here previously). The comparison is not meant to suggest a similarity between pirates and private military companies beyond the organizational and motivational parallels between these non-state forces that operate with paradigms different from the societies they come from. One example is a more democratized operation that includes dropping the discrimination found in their contemporary societies — if they are operating on the same team or ship that is.

When Schumacher does explore the raison d’etre of PMCs use, he has both hits and misses. One "hit" is when he writes: “[b]ecause contract operations do not get the visibility that military operations do, the true cost, in terms of lives and impact on US foreign policy is disguised. As a concerned public, we need to be far more aware and informed about where, when, and how the United States employs these firm.”

However at the same time he misses the point by just including barely a page in his 262 page book on the political realities, but yet frequently returns to the point of the under-appreciated and under-supported contractor and their value. The latter is clearly the point he wants to make and does not want to delve into the politics behind their use like most other books on the subject. This is somewhat refreshing to a reader new to the subject but the human story should not outweigh the concern we the public should have over their deployment. The focus of the book is clearly to tell the story of the “unsung hero”. Schumacher makes no attempt to connect private military contractors with the evolution of war, which isn’t his purpose anyways.

That all said, the book really is a good read and good on first person (almost whole chapters are told by the participant with only setup by Schumacher) accounts. The focus on non-shooters is almost refreshing. At times reading like a novel, it is a quick read.

I was once asked for a reading list that included first-person accounts of private military companies in action. Just a few months ago, I was pressed to provide anything, but I’d include this on a reading list for another — non-academic — perspective.

2006 Naval S&T Partnership Conference

~ Matt Armstrong

Next week — July 31 to August 3 — MountainRunner will be blogging from the Naval Science and Technology Partnership Conference in Washington, DC.

What is this conference?

Presented by the National Defense Industrial Association (NDIA) with technical support from the Office of Naval Research, the 2006 Naval S&T Partnership Conference is the successor to, and builds upon the success of, the six annual partnership conferences previously presented by ONR.  The 2006 Naval S&T Partnership Conference will provide key insight into the Navy & Marine Corps drive to enable revolutionary naval operational concepts that meet the challenges of the 21st century through strategic investment in S&T research.  The Conference will inform government, industry and academia of the direction, emphasis, and scope of the Department of the Navy’s investment in science and technology research, and how companies and universities can do business with the Naval Research Enterprise.

A number of blogs were inviting, including obviously MountainRunner. We will be credentialed as media in an experiment for the conference. In return, the conference simply requests we report (blog) on the conference. This may seem different, and it is, but it is certainly inline with a growing awareness of the Internet (see Defense Science Boards’ research into the value of Google, blogs, and other Net resources). I’ll post which blogs actually show when I get there next week (the confirmed list right now is short so the blog-exclusive press availability with the Chief of Naval Research may be closer to a one-on-one interview).

Here are the highlights of the conference, direct from its preliminary agenda:

  • Hear from the senior leadership of the Department of the Navy, the Office of Naval Research, and the Naval Research Enterprise
  • Gain an understanding of partnership opportunities for industry and academia, and learn how to do business with ONR and the Naval Research Enterprise
  • Get key insights into the Power and Energy challenges and opportunities facing the Navy and Marine Corps in the 21st Century
  • Meet one-on-one with Program Managers from ONR and across the Naval Research Enterprise, including Naval Laboratories and Warfare Centers
  • Learn how to participate in the challenge to creative innovative solutions to meet Fleet and Force requirements in the Future Naval Capabilities (FNC) and Innovative Naval Prototypes (INP) programs.
  • See and discuss innovative technologies from Industry, National and Federal Labs, and Academia in the Conference Exhibit Hall.

The Conference is being extremely helpful in facilitating additional interviews with the Office of Naval Research. Topics I’m looking to discuss and investigate further with ONR includes programs similar to the USS Emory S. Land reach out to Africa recently (blogged here previously and other public diplomacy programs), building strategic relationships ("partnership capacity" as defined in the QDR), thoughts on the Core-Gap & Barnett, and of course piracy. Of course those are just a few things I hope to ask and discuss, but we’ll see what actually transpires after reality sets in.

By the way, "science" is stretched beyond technology if you look at the ONR Science and Technology Departments, which include at the top level: Expeditionary Warfare and Combating Terrorism; Command, Control Communications, Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR); Ocean Battlespace Sensing; Sea Warfare and Weapons; Warfighter Performance Department; Naval Air Warfare and Weapons; and Office of Transition.

Any questions or topics you’d like to have asked or looked into, let me know. I’m open for suggestions, leads, etc.

More to come…

Defense Science Board to Study Impact of Google, Blogs, et al

~ Matt Armstrong

Briefly, Defense Science Board to Study Impact of Google, Blogs, et. al. (defense acquisition, defence purchasing, military procurement):

The "blogosphere" has experienced 6000% growth since 2003, played a role in both reporting and aid coordination in the wake of terror attacks and disasters, and even birthed a whole genre called "MilBlogs" that are often penned by soldiers in the field. Which may explain why the Defense Science Board will conduct a study this summer on the military implications of Internet search engines, online journals and blogs.

Kenneth Krieg, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics and a former Defense Science Board member, requested the study on "Information Management for Net-Centric Operations" to help evaluate the implications of the information network boom. "’Googling’ and ‘blogging’ are making their way into military operations at all levels," Krieg wrote. "But the full implications of this revolution are as yet unknown, and we have no clear direction and defined doctrine." Krieg called access to information and collaboration among those who play a role in these missions "the lifeblood of military and civil-military operations."