military
Auto Added by WPeMatico
How national security is being redefined by climate change
One of the most unfortunate fault lines in climate change politics today is the lack of cooperation between environmentalists and the national security community. Left-wing climate activists don’t exactly hang out with more right-leaning military strategists, the former often seeing the latter as destructive anti-ecological marauders, while the latter often assume the former are unrealistic pests who would prioritize trees and dolphins over human safety.
Yet, climate change is forcing the two to work ever closer together, as uncomfortable as that might be.
In “All Hell Breaking Loose,” emeritus professor and prolific author Michael T. Klare has written a meta-assessment of the Pentagon’s strategic assessments from the last two decades on how climate will shape America’s security environment. Sober and repetitive but not grim, the book is an eye-opening look at how the defense community is coping with one of the most vexing global challenges today.
Climate change weakens the security environment in practically every domain, and in ways that might not be obvious to the non-defense specialist. For the U.S. Navy, which relies on coastal access to shipyards and ports, rising sea levels threaten to diminish and even occasionally demolish its mission readiness, such as when Atlantic hurricanes hit Virginia, one of the largest centers for naval infrastructure in the United States.
While perhaps obvious, it bears repeating that the U.S. military is as much a landlord as a fighting force, with hundreds of bases spread across the country and around the world. A large percentage of these installations face climate-related challenges that can affect mission readiness, and the cost to harden these facilities is likely to reach tens of billions of dollars — and perhaps even more.
Then there is the question of energy. The Pentagon is understandably one of the greatest users of energy in the world, requiring power for bases, jet fuel for planes, and energy for ships on a global scale. Procurement managers are obviously concerned about costs, but their real concern is availability — they need to have reliable fuel options in even the most chaotic environments. That critical priority is increasingly tenuous with climate change, as transit options for oil can be disrupted by everything from a bad storm to a ship stuck in the Suez Canal.
This is where the Pentagon’s mission and the interests of green-minded activists align heavily, if not perfectly. Klare provides examples of how the Pentagon is investing in areas like biofuels, decentralized grid technology, batteries and more as it looks to secure resiliency for its fighting forces. The Pentagon’s budgetary resources might be scorned by critics, but it’s uniquely positioned to pay the so-called green premiums for more reliable energy in ways that few institutions can realistically afford.
That political alignment continues when it comes to humanitarian response, although for vastly different reasons. One of the Pentagon’s chief concerns with global warming is that it will be increasingly waylaid from its highest priority missions — such as protecting against China, Russia, Iran and other long-time adversaries — into responding to humanitarian crises. As one of the only American institutions with the equipment and logistical know-how capable of deploying thousands of responders to disaster zones, the Pentagon is the go-to source for deployments. For Defense, the difficulty is that the armed forces aren’t trained for humanitarian missions — they’re trained for fighting wars. Attacking ISIS-K and managing a camp of climate refugees are decidedly different skills.
Climate activists are fighting for a more stable and equitable world, one that doesn’t lead to millions of climate refugees fleeing from famine and scorching temperatures. The Pentagon similarly wants to shore up fragile states in the hopes of avoiding deployments outside of its core mission. The two groups speak different languages and have different motivations, but the objectives are much the same.
Climate Change Books Summer 2021
- “Can the world really just fall apart?” on How Everything Can Collapse: A Manual for our Times by Pablo Servigne and Raphaël Stevens. Translated from French by Andrew Brown.
- “Bill Gates offers direction, not solutions” on How to Avoid a Climate Disaster: The Solutions We Have and the Breakthroughs We Need by Bill Gates
- “Is the best way to solve climate change to ‘do nothing?’” on How to Do Nothing: Resisting the Attention Economy by Jenny Odell
- “How national security is being redefined by climate change” on All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change by Michael T. Klare
- “Air conditioning is one of the greatest inventions of the 20th Century. It’s also killing the 21st,” an interview with Eric Dean Wilson on his new book, After Cooling: On Freon, Global Warming, and the Terrible Cost of Comfort
- “On the future of walls, or The Wall” on The Wall by John Lanchester
The most interesting dynamic of climate change and national security is, of course, how the global strategic map changes. Russia is a major winner, and Klare provides an exacting account on how the Pentagon is securing the Arctic now that the ice has melted and shipping lanes have opened at the pole for much of the year and soon to be year round. For the first time, America has run training missions for its armed forces on how to operate in the Arctic and prepare for potential contingencies in the region.
Klare’s book is readable, and its subject is electrifyingly fascinating, but this is not a brilliantly written text by any stretch of the imagination. I dubbed it a meta-assessment because it absolutely reads as if it was written by a team of defense planning specialists in the E Ring. It’s a multi-hundred page think tank paper — and as a reader, you either have the stamina to read that or you don’t.
More caustically, the book’s research and primary citations center on the Pentagon’s assessment reports and Congressional testimony and some secondary reporting in newspapers and elsewhere. There are few to no mentions of direct interviews with the participants here, and that’s a major problem given the extremely political nature of climate change in modern U.S. discourse. Klare certainly observes the politics, but we don’t know what generals and the civilian defense leadership would really say if they didn’t have to sign off publicly on a government report. It’s a massive gulf — and begs the question of how much we really get a true picture of the Pentagon’s thinking with this volume.
Nonetheless, the book is an important contribution, and a reminder that the national security community — while protective of its interests — can also be an important vanguard for change on climate disruption. Activists and wonks should drop the animosity and talk to each other a bit more often, as there are alliances to be made.
All Hell Breaking Loose: The Pentagon’s Perspective on Climate Change by Michael T. Klare
Metropolitan Books, 2019, 304 pages
See Also
- Climatic Cataclysm: The Foreign Policy and National Security Implications of Climate Change by Kurt M. Campbell
- The Center for Climate & Security, a think tank devoted to the topic.
Powered by WPeMatico
The US wants startups to get a piece of the $16 billion spent on space tech
The U.S. government is one of the biggest spenders in the nascent space industry, and the man who handles the money for the Air Force’s $16 billion checkbook wants startups to know that his door is open for them.
In all, Will Roper, the Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics, handles about $60 billion worth of budget for the Air Force — a mandate that includes spending money on the new tech initiatives the Air Force deems important.
Historically, the Department of Defense hasn’t been the greatest at working with startups — and many tech companies have been loath to work with the DoD. However, since much of modern civilian infrastructure is based on global positioning systems and other satellite technologies that fall under the Defense Department’s purview, those views on cooperation are changing on both sides.
“Space isn’t a quiet domain of communication and navigation and exploration anymore,” Roper told the audience at TechCrunch’s latest Sessions event, TC Sessions: Space 2020. “It’s increasingly becoming a hostile place… So we’re gearing up a new kind of competition on the military side that could extend to space and that’s creating a lot of new space programs.”
Roper emphasized that the interest from the Air Force and the government more broadly extends well beyond offensive capabilities and military priorities. As space becomes an economic opportunity, Roper sees the Air Force as an engine for driving technology development forward in ways that have commercial benefits.
“It’s a great, great time for innovation in new technologies that could help the military, but we want to do more than just help the military. That’s the old thinking in the Pentagon. That’s all that would help us win the Cold War in the 20th Century, but it’s not going to help us in the 21st, where technology is globalized and accelerating,” Roper said.
“We want to find ways where our military mission and our funding can help accelerate commercial markets too, so it’s competing on a much bigger stage. But we think it’s where we need to aspire to be, so that we’re playing the right catalyst role in this nation and with our partners around the world,” Roper said.
There are several programs that startups can tap to get those federal dollars. Two of the easiest points of entry are through the AFWERX and its recently announced SpaceWERX arm focused entirely on space technology.
“These look like any tech company,” Roper told the audience at the TechCrunch event. “They’re outside our fence lines. They’re easy to walk into… Now you don’t have to know the mission, we will help you find the mission and the customer — the warfighter associated with it. It’s a great model because it keeps the company focused on what they know best, which is their tech.”
Over the last three years, Roper estimated that the AFWERX program had brought 2,300 companies into the Air Force and Space Force programs, and most of them had never worked with the military before, he said.
Within AFWERX there are three programs that particularly relate to integrating startups into the procurement process, Roper said. One is the Spark program, which pairs military with private industry; one is the AFVentures program, which is designed to finance new innovations coming from private industry; and finally there’s the Prime program, which helps commercialize and certify technologies.
Roper pointed to the recent certification the Air Force gave to Joby Aviation for its flying cars. “So there’s a new military market that will hopefully generate a new commercial market,” Roper said.
In 2021, the Prime program will expand to space technologies, according to Roper.
As the demand for new tech grows, there’s no shortage of innovations Roper would like to see from private industry. From new autonomous innovations that could help co-pilot spacecraft to technology for refueling and in-space maneuverability, and reusable equipment from boosters to other components that can bring costs down.
Roper also acknowledged that the Pentagon has a long way to go to “hack the acquisition system” when it comes to dual-use technologies.
Entrepreneurs have pointed out that one of the biggest obstacles to the growth of the commercial space industry has been the inability of the U.S. government to open up the technology for use by private industry.
Roper hopes to change that. “We want to use our military dollars, our mission, and potentially our certifications to help get you there without changing your core product,” he said. “If you succeed as a commercial success, then we succeed as well, because now we’ve got a great tech partner, that hopefully we can continue to come to to solve problems in future. The thing that we’ll want to understand early on is how our military market and all those benefits I just mentioned, how can they help you get to commercial success? And what is it that we not need to do to pull you off that trajectory?”
Contracts with AFWERX are fixed-price and progress as companies hit certain milestones on the product roadmap. These orders increase incrementally as the technology proves itself, so a contract could start with the delivery of a prototype, then experimental usage, then a commercial contract, then broad adoption. “What we’re looking to do is see if you can move the ball forward on your technology, and if you do, then we do another contract. We step you up our process,” Roper said.
Roper sees the project as nothing less than the evolution of the aerospace and defense industry.
“We have a lot of amazing companies today that helped build stealth bombers and space planes and all sorts of awesome stuff. They’re defense companies and we still need them,” Roper said. “What we’re hoping to help build in this century is a set of new companies that are just tech companies. They’re not defense, purely, and they’re not commercial purely. They’re just technology companies and they do a bit of business on both sides.”
Powered by WPeMatico
Jeff Bezos is just fine taking the Pentagon’s $10B JEDI cloud contract
Some tech companies might have a problem taking money from the Department of Defense, but Amazon isn’t one of them, as CEO Jeff Bezos made clear today at the Wired25 conference. Just last week, Google pulled out of the running for the Pentagon’s $10 billion, 10-year JEDI cloud contract, but Bezos suggested that he was happy to take the government’s money.
Bezos has been surprisingly quiet about the contract up until now, but his company has certainly attracted plenty of attention from the companies competing for the JEDI deal. Just last week IBM filed a formal protest with the Government Accountability Office claiming that the contract was stacked in favor one vendor. And while it didn’t name it directly, the clear implication was that company was the one owned by Bezos.
Last summer Oracle also filed a protest and also complained that they believed the government had set up the contract to favor Amazon, a charge spokesperson Heather Babb denied. “The JEDI Cloud final RFP reflects the unique and critical needs of DOD, employing the best practices of competitive pricing and security. No vendors have been pre-selected,” she said last month.
While competitors are clearly worried about Amazon, which has a substantial lead in the cloud infrastructure market, the company itself has kept quiet on the deal until now. Bezos set his company’s support in patriotic terms and one of leadership.
“Sometimes one of the jobs of the senior leadership team is to make the right decision, even when it’s unpopular. And if if big tech companies are going to turn their back on the US Department of Defense, this country is going to be in trouble,” he said.
“I know everyone is conflicted about the current politics in this country, but this country is a gem,” he added.
While Google tried to frame its decision as taking a principled stand against misuse of technology by the government, Bezos chose another tack, stating that all technology can be used for good or ill. “Technologies are always two-sided. You know there are ways they can be misused as well as used, and this isn’t new,” Bezos told Wired25.
He’s not wrong of course, but it’s hard not to look at the size of the contract and see it as purely a business decision on his part. Amazon is as hot for that $10 billion contract as any of its competitors. What’s different in this talk is that Bezos made it sound like a purely patriotic decision, rather than economic one.
The Pentagon’s JEDI contract could have a value of up to $10 billion with a maximum length of 10 years. The contract is framed as a two year deal with two three-year options and a final one for two years. The DOD can opt out before exercising any of the options.
Bidding for the contract closed last Friday. The DOD is expected to choose the winning vendor next April.
Powered by WPeMatico
IBM files formal JEDI protest a day before bidding process closes
IBM announced yesterday that it has filed a formal protest with the U.S. Government Accountability Office over the structure of the Pentagon’s winner-take-all $10 billion, 10-year JEDI cloud contract. The protest came just a day before the bidding process is scheduled to close. As IBM put it in a blog post, they took issues with the single vendor approach. They are certainly not alone.
Just about every vendor short of Amazon, which has remained mostly quiet, has been complaining about this strategy. IBM certainly faces a tough fight going up against Amazon and Microsoft.
IBM doesn’t disguise the fact that it thinks the contract has been written for Amazon to win and they believe the one-vendor approach simply doesn’t make sense. “No business in the world would build a cloud the way JEDI would and then lock in to it for a decade. JEDI turns its back on the preferences of Congress and the administration, is a bad use of taxpayer dollars and was written with just one company in mind.” IBM wrote in the blog post explaining why it was protesting the deal before a decision was made or the bidding was even closed.
For the record, DOD spokesperson Heather Babb told TechCrunch last month that the bidding is open and no vendor is favored. “The JEDI Cloud final RFP reflects the unique and critical needs of DOD, employing the best practices of competitive pricing and security. No vendors have been pre-selected,” she said.
Much like Oracle, which filed a protest of its own back in August, IBM is a traditional vendor that was late to the cloud. It began a journey to build a cloud business in 2013 when it purchased Infrastructure as a Service vendor SoftLayer and has been using its checkbook to buy software services to add on top of SoftLayer ever since. IBM has concentrated on building cloud services around AI, security, big data, blockchain and other emerging technologies.
Both IBM and Oracle have a problem with the one-vendor approach, especially one that locks in the government for a 10-year period. It’s worth pointing out that the contract actually is an initial two-year deal with two additional three year options and a final two year option. The DOD has left open the possibility this might not go the entire 10 years.
It’s also worth putting the contract in perspective. While 10 years and $10 billion is nothing to sneeze at, neither is it as market altering as it might appear, not when some are predicting the cloud will be $100 billion a year market very soon.
IBM uses the blog post as a kind of sales pitch as to why it’s a good choice, while at the same time pointing out the flaws in the single vendor approach and complaining that it’s geared toward a single unnamed vendor that we all know is Amazon.
The bidding process closes today, and unless something changes as a result of these protests, the winner will be selected next April
Powered by WPeMatico
Why the Pentagon’s $10 billion JEDI deal has cloud companies going nuts
By now you’ve probably heard of the Defense Department’s massive winner-take-all $10 billion cloud contract dubbed the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (or JEDI for short).
Star Wars references aside, this contract is huge, even by government standards.The Pentagon would like a single cloud vendor to build out its enterprise cloud, believing rightly or wrongly that this is the best approach to maintain focus and control of their cloud strategy.
Department of Defense (DOD) spokesperson Heather Babb tells TechCrunch the department sees a lot of upside by going this route. “Single award is advantageous because, among other things, it improves security, improves data accessibility and simplifies the Department’s ability to adopt and use cloud services,” she said.
Whatever company they choose to fill this contract, this is about modernizing their computing infrastructure and their combat forces for a world of IoT, artificial intelligence and big data analysis, while consolidating some of their older infrastructure. “The DOD Cloud Initiative is part of a much larger effort to modernize the Department’s information technology enterprise. The foundation of this effort is rationalizing the number of networks, data centers and clouds that currently exist in the Department,” Babb said.
Setting the stage
It’s possible that whoever wins this DOD contract could have a leg up on other similar projects in the government. After all it’s not easy to pass muster around security and reliability with the military and if one company can prove that they are capable in this regard, they could be set up well beyond this one deal.
As Babb explains it though, it’s really about figuring out the cloud long-term. “JEDI Cloud is a pathfinder effort to help DOD learn how to put in place an enterprise cloud solution and a critical first step that enables data-driven decision making and allows DOD to take full advantage of applications and data resources,” she said.
Photo: Mischa Keijser for Getty Images
The single vendor component, however, could explain why the various cloud vendors who are bidding, have lost their minds a bit over it — everyone except Amazon, that is, which has been mostly silent, happy apparently to let the process play out.
The belief amongst the various other players, is that Amazon is in the driver’s seat for this bid, possibly because they delivered a $600 million cloud contract for the government in 2013, standing up a private cloud for the CIA. It was a big deal back in the day on a couple of levels. First of all, it was the first large-scale example of an intelligence agency using a public cloud provider. And of course the amount of money was pretty impressive for the time, not $10 billion impressive, but a nice contract.
For what it’s worth, Babb dismisses such talk, saying that the process is open and no vendor has an advantage. “The JEDI Cloud final RFP reflects the unique and critical needs of DOD, employing the best practices of competitive pricing and security. No vendors have been pre-selected,” she said.
Complaining loudly
As the Pentagon moves toward selecting its primary cloud vendor for the next decade, Oracle in particular has been complaining to anyone who will listen that Amazon has an unfair advantage in the deal, going so far as to file a formal complaint last month, even before bids were in and long before the Pentagon made its choice.
Photo: mrdoomits for Getty Images (cropped)
Somewhat ironically, given their own past business model, Oracle complained among other things that the deal would lock the department into a single platform over the long term. They also questioned whether the bidding process adhered to procurement regulations for this kind of deal, according to a report in the Washington Post. In April, Bloomberg reported that co-CEO Safra Catz complained directly to the president that the deal was tailor made for Amazon.
Microsoft hasn’t been happy about the one-vendor idea either, pointing out that by limiting itself to a single vendor, the Pentagon could be missing out on innovation from the other companies in the back and forth world of the cloud market, especially when we’re talking about a contract that stretches out for so long.
As Microsoft’s Leigh Madden told TechCrunch in April, the company is prepared to compete, but doesn’t necessarily see a single vendor approach as the best way to go. “If the DOD goes with a single award path, we are in it to win, but having said that, it’s counter to what we are seeing across the globe where 80 percent of customers are adopting a multi-cloud solution,” he said at the time.
He has a valid point, but the Pentagon seems hell bent on going forward with the single vendor idea, even though the cloud offers much greater interoperability than proprietary stacks of the 1990s (for which Oracle and Microsoft were prime examples at the time).
Microsoft has its own large DOD contract in place for almost a billion dollars, although this deal from 2016 was for Windows 10 and related hardware for DOD employees, rather than a pure cloud contract like Amazon has with the CIA.
It also recently released Azure Stack for government, a product that lets government customers install a private version of Azure with all the same tools and technologies you find in the public version, and could prove attractive as part of its JEDI bid.
Cloud market dynamics
It’s also possible that the fact that Amazon controls the largest chunk of the cloud infrastructure market, might play here at some level. While Microsoft has been coming fast, it’s still about a third of Amazon in terms of market size, as Synergy Research’s Q42017 data clearly shows.
The market hasn’t shifted dramatically since this data came out. While market share alone wouldn’t be a deciding factor, Amazon came to market first and it is much bigger in terms of market than the next four combined, according to Synergy. That could explain why the other players are lobbying so hard and seeing Amazon as the biggest threat here, because it’s probably the biggest threat in almost every deal where they come up against each other, due to its sheer size.
Consider also that Oracle, which seems to be complaining the loudest, was rather late to the cloud after years of dismissing it. They could see JEDI as a chance to establish a foothold in government that they could use to build out their cloud business in the private sector too.
10 years might not be 10 years
It’s worth pointing out that the actual deal has the complexity and opt-out clauses of a sports contract with just an initial two-year deal guaranteed. A couple of three-year options follow, with a final two-year option closing things out. The idea being, that if this turns out to be a bad idea, the Pentagon has various points where they can back out.
Photo: Henrik Sorensen for Getty Images (cropped)
In spite of the winner-take-all approach of JEDI, Babb indicated that the agency will continue to work with multiple cloud vendors no matter what happens. “DOD has and will continue to operate multiple clouds and the JEDI Cloud will be a key component of the department’s overall cloud strategy. The scale of our missions will require DOD to have multiple clouds from multiple vendors,” she said.
The DOD accepted final bids in August, then extended the deadline for Requests for Proposal to October 9th. Unless the deadline gets extended again, we’re probably going to finally hear who the lucky company is sometime in the coming weeks, and chances are there is going to be lot of whining and continued maneuvering from the losers when that happens.
Powered by WPeMatico
The Wizards of Armageddon set up shop in Silicon Valley
The Research and Development Corporation (RAND) has helped the U.S. think through some of the toughest scientific and regulatory challenges since the 1940s. This year, the think tank is opening its first office in the SF Bay Area. It’s positioning itself to weigh in on some of Silicon Valley’s largest research projects, like autonomous vehicles, drones, AI, cybersecurity and… Read More
Powered by WPeMatico
Army Special Operations Command reportedly ditching Android for iPhone in the field
While the ordinary proving ground of the smartphone may be the mean streets of the city, devices are to be found on the field of battle, too — and if a report from DoDBuzz is to be believed, Android may soon be giving way to iOS for some special operations forces. VetTechTrek is creating an e-learning platform to help veterans build careers in the tech industry
VetTechTrek is a nonprofit founded last year with the goal of helping military veterans network with the technology industry. Over the last 12 months they have worked toward this goal by hosting multiple “treks” that brought more than 180 veterans and spouses to meet with veterans who work at more than 60 technology startups in New York, Silicon Valley and Washington, DC.… Read More
Powered by WPeMatico