Boeing's Albaugh: US Aerospace Leadership at Risk From Global Competition; Warns of America's "Intellectual Disarmament"

Jim Albaugh, president and CEO, Boeing Commercial Airplanes, addressed the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Aviation Summit, which brings together top experts and leaders from all sectors of aviation to discuss key issues facing the industry. Albaugh warned that the U.S. is at risk of slipping from the top of the industry unless changes are made. (Courtesy of U.S. Chamber of Commerce)

Washington, DC   -   "America may be the world's leader in aerospace, but other countries are making commercial aviation a priority and investing heavily in innovation", said Jim Albaugh, president and CEO of Commercial Airplanes during a presentation on 4/27/11..

"Will we take the steps required to maintain our leadership? Or will we allow aerospace and aviation to join the list of industries that America used to lead?" Albaugh asked last week at the 10th annual Aviation Summit, sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in Washington, D.C. "We can overcome the threats if we take the right steps."

The summit brings together top experts and leaders from all sectors of aviation to discuss key issues facing the industry. In addition to Albaugh, this year's speakers included Randy Babbitt, administrator of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration. Billy Glover, Commercial Airplanes vice president, Environment and Aviation Policy, served on a panel devoted to aviation's impact on alternative fuels.

In his remarks, Albaugh talked about three forces shaping the industry today: globalization, increasing competition and shifting demographics in the workforce. Earthquakes in Japan can affect businesses on the other side of the world. More companies -- and countries -- are competing for the $3.6 trillion commercial airplane market in the next 20 years. Highly skilled engineers are nearing retirement and the United States is not producing enough engineers to meet future needs.

"It's contributing to what I call the intellectual disarmament of our country," Albaugh said. "Along with reduced R&D spending, I believe this puts us at risk. If we continue along this path, America will lose its lead in aerospace. We risk breaking a long-standing continuum of capability in our industry, our economy will lose an important engine of growth and our country will be more vulnerable and less secure."

Albaugh advocated for a clear, coherent and comprehensive industrial policy and for policies that encourage innovation. He also urged support for a public education system that equips young people to address the challenges of our time: climate change, energy independence and health care, among them.

"We are the stewards of a proud and vital legacy," Albaugh said. "Together, we can keep America the world's leader in aerospace."

Contact: Christina E. Kelly, Boeing Communications

C-Span Video: http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Albau

Publisher's note: Albaugh's comments are timely and quite warranted given the current state of US Aerospace and the US industrial base at large.  The analyses linked below lend further credence, we believe, to the accuracy, relevancy and criticality of his observations...  Myron D. Stokes

Related:

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/annual-report-to-congress-military-and-security-developments-involving-the-peoples-republic-of-china-2010
http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2011/RAND_Aerospace_Report%5B1%5D.pdf

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/speed-news-aerospace-and-defense-conference-an-usnato-controlled-heavylift-industry-utilizing-boeing-bc17-globemaster-iii-commericalmilitary-airlifters
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/ghhsecafroche-the-grand-strategy13-presentation
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/project-on-national-security-reform-vision-working-group-report-and-scenarios-including-industrial-base-south-china-sea
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/emotion-reportscom-archives-boeing-going-proposed-departure-of-aircraft-giant-stuns-seattle-presentation-944652
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/ghh-press-release-60110-updated-from-52610-52810-51410-docx3
http://emotionreportscom.blogspot.com/2011/03/ready-for-takeoff-chinas-advancing.html?spref=gb

READY FOR TAKEOFF: CHINA'S ADVANCING AEROSPACE INDUSTRY

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 22, 2011

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission was created by Congress to report on the national security implications of the bilateral trade and economic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China. For more information, visit www.uscc.gov.

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Releases Report:


Ready for Takeoff: China’s Advancing Aerospace Industry

Shipborne SU-33: China is known to be creating indigenous PLAN fleet defense fighter craft based on Russian designs  Image: Russian Navy

Washington, D.C. - The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission has released a new report, “Ready for Takeoff: China’s Advancing Aerospace Industry,” which assesses China’s commercial aviation manufacturing capabilities, its commercial and military capabilities in space, efforts of the Chinese government to encourage foreign participation in the development of China’s aerospace industry, transfers of foreign aerospace technology to China, the extent to which U.S. and other foreign aerospace firms are dependent on supplies from China, and the implications of all of these issues for U.S. security interests.


Among other things, the report analyzes the role of foreign firms in the development of China’s aviation manufacturing industry, summarizes the policies of the Chinese government toward foreign companies, and describes U.S. and other foreign joint ventures and cooperative research and development activities in China.


The report asserts that “there is no question that China’s growing civilian aerospace capabilities are contributing to the development of its military aerospace capabilities” and details developments in China’s military and space capabilities, including launch vehicles, communications satellites, civilian earth-observation satellites, military imagery reconnaissance satellites, and position, navigation, and timing (PNT) satellites.


This report was prepared for the Commission by Roger Cliff, Chad J. R. Ohlandt and David Yang of the RAND Corporation National Security Research Division. It can be found at:

http://www.uscc.gov/researchpapers/2011/RAND_Aerospace_Report%5B1%5D.pdf

For a copy of this and other USCC reports, please visit www.uscc.gov. For a hard copy of a USCC Annual Report to Congress, please contact Tim Lipka at AnnualReportRequest@uscc.gov or 202-624-1407.

Related:

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/project-on-national-security-reform-vision-working-group-report-and-scenarios-including-industrial-base-south-china-sea

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/richard-holbrookes-world-memories-of-a-newsweek-special-correspondent-a-quasibiblios-by-myron-d-stokes-6378388

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/annual-report-to-congress-military-and-security-developments-involving-the-peoples-republic-of-china-2010

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/20092010-auto-industry-analysis-gms-transition-to-china-4-emotion-reportscom

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/20092010-auto-industry-analysis-gms-transition-to-china-4-emotion-reportscom

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC/future-of-the-auto-industry-crisis-on-asimov-a-vision-of-2085-dr-sheila-ronis-e-motion-reportscom-myron-stokes-publisher-presentation

A Critical Matter of National and Economic Security: U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission 2010 Report to Congress

Today, [November 17, 2010] the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission releases its 2010 Report to Congress. The Commission’s Chairman and Vice Chairman discuss the Commission’s findings and recommendations.



In his opening statement, Commission Chairman Dan Slane said “The 2010 Annual Report reflects the Commission’s conclusions that China has failed in some notable areas to fulfill the promises it made nine years ago when it joined the World Trade Organization. Specifically, China is adopting a highly discriminatory policy of favoring domestic producers over foreign manufacturers. Under the guise of fostering “indigenous innovation” in its economy, the government of China appears determined to exclude foreigners from bidding on government contracts at the central, provincial, and local levels. In addition, China has proposed that its many state-owned corporations be exempt from WTO rules on procurement. The Chinese government quite simply intends to wall off a majority of its economy from international competition.”


In her opening statement, Vice Chairman Carolyn Bartholomew commented on China’s military modernization, saying “As a result of China’s improved offensive air and missile capabilities, the Chinese military has strengthened its capacity to threaten U.S. forces and bases in the region. Currently, China’s conventional missile capabilities alone may be sufficient to temporarily knock out five of the six U.S. air bases in East Asia. Saturation missile strikes could destroy U.S. air defenses, runways, parked aircraft, and fuel and maintenance facilities. Complicating this scenario is the future deployment of China’s anti-ship ballistic missile, which could hold U.S. aircraft carriers at bay outside their normal operating range.”


Among the topics in the 316-page report:

Economics and Trade Issues:

· China’s ‘indigenous innovation’ policy to promote favored industries and limit imports.

· China’s currency manipulation and its effects on the United States.

· China’s purchases of U.S. Treasury securities and the implications for the United States.

· China’s measures to restrict rare earth element exports.

· China’s past and future role in the World Trade Organization.

Chinese Carrier Shi-Lang at Dalian Yards.This Ukr. 67,500 Ton Kuznetsov-class Vessel, Originally Varyag,is Operational
Now According to Our Intelligence Sources, Not 2015 as recently reported - Image PLAN

National Defense Issues:

· China’s growing air and missile capabilities, and the increasing capacity to strike U.S. bases and allies in the region.

· China’s improving commercial aviation manufacturing capabilities, and the spillover benefits for China’s defense aviation industry.

· The increasingly sophisticated nature of malicious computer activity associated with China.

Foreign Affairs Issues:

· China’s increasing political, economic, energy and security interactions with Southeast Asia, and the implications for U.S. interests in the region.

· Recent developments in the China-Taiwan relationship, and implications for the United States.
Energy and Environmental Issues:

· China’s efforts to promote green energy in order to increase its energy security, prevent environmental degradation, and develop a globally competitive green energy industry.

· Ohio’s response to China’s promotion of its alternative energy industries.

Censorship Issues:

· How China’s revised state secrets laws may conflict with U.S. disclosure requirements and put U.S. investments in Chinese firms at risk.

Related Analyses:

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/ronis-scenario1-2-06a-sans-pw
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/annual-report-to-congress-military-and-security-developments-involving-the-peoples-republic-of-china-2010
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/project-on-national-security-reform-vision-working-group-report-and-scenarios-including-industrial-base-south-china-sea
http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/20092010-auto-industry-analysis-gms-transition-to-china-4-emotion-reportscom

The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC) will release its 2010 Annual Report to Congress on November 17th



Image: China Flag.org

This year’s report will cover recent developments in the U.S.-China trade and economic relationship; implications of U.S. debt to China; China’s role in the WTO; China’s growing air and missile capabilities; China’s role in Asia, including Southeast Asia, Hong Kong, and Taiwan; China’s environmental and green energy policies; U.S. and Chinese efforts to promote solar and wind energy manufacturing; China’s domestic internet censorship practices; and the external implications of China’s internet related activities.

The 2009 Report can be accessed here:
http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2009/annual_report_full_09.pdf

Related: Project On National Security Reform Vision Working Group Report and Scenarios

http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/project-on-national-security-reform-vision-working-group-report-and-scenarios-including-industrial-base-south-china-sea

Testimony of eMOTION! REPORTS.com Publisher Myron D. Stokes During 2006 Hearings CHINA'S IMPACT ON THE U.S. AUTO AND AUTO PARTS INDUSTRIES (Page 174)

http://ow.ly/313Dn (note: Site may request download permission)

eMOTION! REPORTS.com Publisher's Response to ChinaDaily Analysis "SAIC Says Likely to Participate in GM IPO"

Delivery of Buick to Chinese Customer  Image: GM

"Colleagues:   

Until China ceases its prosecution of provable economic war against the United States, as confirmed by the United States-China Economic and Security Review Commission (USCC.gov) 2009 Report to Congress(http://www.uscc.gov/annual_report/2009/annual_report_full_09.pdf) and an unprecedented military build-up with the intent to challenge, if not usurp, the US/UK as the premier global power (stated with specificity by the US Department of Defense Annual Report to Congress (http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/annual-report-to-congress-military-and-security-developments-involving-the-peoples-republic-of-china-2010 ) GM leadership and its current owner, the United States government, are ill-advised to permit any further transfer of manufacturing processes and other sensitive technologies to still-communist China. Technology, it cannot be argued, that is being used to greatly enhance its own defense industrial base in the manner of DARPA.


"Moreover, recommendations are being made that the SEC delay the IPO for at least a year, and that CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) is further empowered to prevent SAIC or any other Beijing-controlled entity from GM IPO participation in the interests of national security.


"The following analysis "GM's Transition to China" goes into great depth relative to China's aspirations, motivations and the profound changes it still needs to make --particularly in the human rights arena which includes acknowledgement of a Mao-ordered mass murder of old and infirm Chinese citizens of historically unprecedented magnitude in 1949 -- in order to gain the perception, if not reality, of "normalcy" it so desperately seeks through any means, covert or overt, necessary. ( http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/20092010-auto-industry-analysis-gms-transition-to-china-4-emotion-reportscom  )

"Whether those individuals, corporations and policy makers who have allowed themselves to become blinded by the economic potential that China represents -- and is demonstrating -- want to believe it or not, armed conflict with the world's oldest continuing civilization is on the near horizon; an emergent reality brought into sharp focus via the "Industrial Base" analysis contained within the recently released "Project on National Security Reform Vision Working Group Report and Scenarios". (http://www.slideshare.net/GHHLLC2/project-on-national-security-reform-vision-working-group-report-and-scenarios-including-industrial-base-south-china-sea)


"While we applaud the observable results of China's second "Great Leap Forward" we are mindful of the words a colleague once wisely uttered: "Embrace globalization... just don't let it kill you."


Myron D. Stokes
Publisher
eMOTION! REPORTS.com http://www.emotionreports.com

SOURCE: US "ENCOURAGING" CHINA'S SAIC TO TAKE CONTROLLING INTEREST IN GM DESPITE NATIONAL SECURITY RISK (Update 12/09 release)

GM Shanghai Campus Media Conference  Image: GM China

"It is our understanding several members of the original GM Task Force have been, and are, acting in the interests of China and not the US. We believe that the data presented in the December release and other analyses presented over the years, supports this contention." - Myron D. Stokes, Publisher


Detroit, MI, September 21, 2010 (PressReleasePoint) -- UPDATE: eMOTION! REPORTS.com sources are advising that officials within the US government, despite strong objections voiced by representatives of both CFIUS (Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States) and the Department of Defense (DoD), are "encouraging" China's SAIC to take a controlling interest in GM, with the intent of neutralizing its near-USD 50bil interest.



"Compromising national security", said a source who asked not to be identified as they were not authorized to speak on the adminstration's behalf, "in the interest of 'balancing the budget' with a Communist, dictatorial regime identified by the ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS: Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2010 as a clear and emergent 'threat' is not wise. It is our hope that wiser minds will prevail, considering the outcome in pursuing this course is decidedly ominous."



China's core aspirations to dominate the world's auto industry - and by natural extension, manufacturing as a whole - has been outlined with specificity by eMOTION! REPORTS.com, as evidenced by its December 2009 release 'GM's Transition to China"



Publisher Myron D. Stokes stated that "It is our understanding several members of the original GM Task Force have been, and are, acting in the interests of China and not the US. We believe that the data presented in the December release and other analyses presented over the years, supports this contention." -
Go to Full Press Release

Boeing Response to Public Reports Regarding the WTO's Interim Decision in DS 353 - Sep 15, 2010

Boeing Response to Public Reports Regarding the WTO's Interim Decision in DS 353 - Sep 15, 2010


Publisher's note:  According to my colleague Dr. Sheila Ronis, a national security strategist and Director, MBA Programs Walsh College, Europeans, and the rest of world inclusive of China and Japan, have consistently demonstrated they are "more wise and understanding than most Americans when it comes to protection of a given country's manufacturing base."  As she observed in the 2003 eMOTION! REPORTS.com analysis "Super-Globalism: Strategies For Maintaining a Robust Industrial Base Through Technological, Policy and Process  Improvement",  (http://www.emotionreports.com/Super_Globalism/superglobalism.htm) structured to drive home the point of the critical nature of industrial base sustainability, "Winning wars requires fighting and winning three battles, simultaneously. This is true for a lifecycle product team and the Pentagon.



"The near battle is where the troops are engaged in daily combat. For a team engaged in product development, the near battle is in the daily designing, developing, engineering, and manufacturing of the product. The near battle can be described as a product being made and sold in the marketplace on a day-by-day basis in competition with global competitors.


"The rear battle is the infrastructure, or foundation needed to support a continuous near battle. This includes enablers in the environment such as well-educated and trained people, including leadership, well-designed processes, and the development and inculcation of doctrine or governing and operating principles and the associated accountabilities required.


"The deep battle is the infrastructure needed to fight future battles. For product teams, this is the investment in future infrastructures, such as R&D or advanced manufacturing, the development of process, holistic management and the skills and learning which are required for the future of all employees – or soldiers.


"The rules of war say that all three battles must be fought at the same time, so leadership must align itself, the behavior of all its people and the organization’s capability as the three battlefields are planned for, strategies are determined, and executed. The three battles are viewed as a system."


"Conversely, the utilization of war strategies and tactics by a company or a country seeking dominance in a given industrial sector demands a response in kind. Failure to do ensures the ignominy of defeat. "

Wise and perhaps prescient words - if not warning - of an urgent need for trade policy shapers and executive management within industry to significantly modify their worldview in such matters. - Myron D. Stokes



Boeing KC-767 Tanker   Image: Boeing

CHICAGO, Sept. 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Boeing (NYSE: BA) today released the following statement, responding to public reports indicating that the WTO panel examining European Union allegations of U.S. government assistance to Boeing has issued a confidential interim ruling rejecting the vast majority of Europe's claims:


"If today's reports are accurate that some $3 billion of the EU's claims were upheld by the WTO, excluding the claims that relate to past programs long ago remedied by Congress, then the ruling amounts to a massive rejection of the EU case and confirms that European launch aid to Airbus stands as the single largest and most flagrant illegal subsidy in the aerospace industry.

"Nothing in today's public reports on the European case against the U.S. even begins to compare to the $20 billion in illegal subsidies that the WTO found last June that Airbus/EADS has received (comprised of $15 billion in launch aid, $2.2 billion in equity infusions, $1.7 billion in infrastructure, and roughly $1.5 billion in targeted research support).

"Nor are there seemingly any violations requiring remedy approaching the scale of remedy required of Airbus/EADS as a result of the WTO's June ruling that European governments must withdraw and remedy the $4 billion in still outstanding illegal launch aid subsidies that Airbus/EADS received for the development of its A380. Billions must be repaid or restructured on proven commercial terms. And, equally, they must remedy the adverse effects of the other $16 billion in illegal subsidies, too.

"Neither do the public reports suggest that Boeing's traditional market based approach to financing new aircraft development will need to change; a distinct contrast to the requirement that Airbus/EADS abandon its plans for financing development of new models such as the A350 through launch aid subsidies.

"Given the shape of today's opinion, as it has been reported, the WTO findings against the US are likely to require few changes in U.S. policies and practices. One of the two principal matters that the WTO is reported to have cited as inconsistent with its rules was long ago remedied by the Congress: general US export tax policy embodied in FSC/ETI. That was litigated at the WTO and remedied last decade. As to the second principal matter – NASA research – we are heartened to read that, contrary to statements earlier today from European sources, three-quarters of the subsidies at issue were found to be wholly compliant with WTO rules.

"Today's ruling underscores our confidence in the WTO processes and dispute-resolution procedures. We applaud the body for its work and continue to look to Airbus/EADS and the EU to recognize that in today's global market, it is essential that everyone play by the rules and abide by the WTO requirements. Playing by the rules, for Airbus/EADS, means withdrawing their still-outstanding A380 prohibited launch aid subsidy and financing the A350 on commercial terms."

Contact: Tim Neale, Boeing, 703-465-3220

Boeing C-17 (New) - Lockheed-Martin C-5 (Retrofit): Government Accountability Office (GAO) Nov. 2008 DoD Strategic Airlift Cost Analysis

Publisher's note: A follow on to this analysis was issued the following year, with virtually no change in the data that counts. Nevertheless, it was more reflective of the objections raised by the Office of the Secretary of Defense while still raising strong doubts about the SECDEF's motivations in terms of continuing attempts to kill C-17. This, in spite of its being one of the most operationally and cost effective platforms in DoD inventory.  This document, along with the just released and much delayed DoD Annual Report to Congress on China's military preparedness, is demonstrative of budgetary restraint objectives all but wholly dismissive of the prevailing geo-political/geo-military state of affairs.
Excerpt:
'The Air Force has cut the number of C-5s it plans to fully modernize by more than half because of substantial cost increases in the C-5 Reliability Enhancement and Reengining Program (RERP) and plans to acquire more C-17s, with additional congressional funding.

'Currently, the Air Force plans to provide avionics upgrades to all 111 C-5s, limit RERP to 52 C-5s, and acquire 205 (now 223) C-17s. However, this mix may change again, based in part on the results of a new mobility capabilities study, the findings of which DOD plans to release in May 2009.

'While the new study is expected to consider transport needs for the future force, DOD has not identified specific metrics it will use to make strategic airlift decisions—a concern GAO raised about DOD’s previous mobility capabilities study and one DOD agreed to address in future studies.

'The Air Force currently estimates it will spend $9.1 billion on upgrading the C-5s. However, this estimate may be understated because DOD did not apply risk or uncertainty analyses to its RERP major cost drivers. Moreover, the current RERP is underfunded by almost $300 million and may be unachievable if the engine production schedule is not met.

 Relative Capability Increases from Modernized C-5s and New C-17 Aircraft
'Finally, if the cost for C-5 modernization continues to increase, Air Force officials may have to reconsider the mix within its airlift portfolio or request additional funding.

'Additional investments in C-17 aircraft may become more attractive. Currently, a new C-17 would cost about $276 million compared to $132 million to fully modernize a C-5. Each new C-17 potentially adds 100 percent of its cargo capacity toward meeting the total airlift requirement.(ital. ours)

'Because the C-5s are already part of the operational force, each aircraft’s current capacity is already counted toward the total requirement. Consequently, according to DOD data, the C-5 modernization programs only provide a marginal increase of 14 percent in capability over nonmodernized aircraft.

'Using DOD’s million ton-mile per day planning factors, we, working in collaboration with DOD, calculated that DOD would need to fully modernize 7 C-5s to attain the equivalent capability achieved from acquiring 1 additional C-17 and the costs would be over 3 times more (see table 3)."

Cost per flying hour                            Mission Capable Rate
C-5                     C-17                             C-5                           C-17
$23,100              $11,300                       53%                          86%

Boeing C-17 (New) - Lockheed-Martin C-5 (Retrofit): Government Accountability Office (GAO) Nov. 2008 DoD Strategic Airlift Cost Analysis

View more documents from eMOTION! REPORTS.com.

Recommendation by SECDEF Gates to Eliminate Joint Forces Command May be Viewed as Step to Dismantling of US Military

Co-crafter of Goldwater-Nichols Act
Senator Barry Goldwater
Image: Time Magazine

"Needless to say, it is deeply disturbing that that you would apparently act on a recommendation that reflects superficial research and a lack of analytical rigor." - Virginia Delegation

August 17, 2010 Washington, DC -- According to a colleague, the letter to follow lines out the Virginia delegation of congress' objection to the closure of JFCOM. It provides an excellent counterpoint to the task/purpose that the SECDEF laid out in his press conference last week. Although it is clearly objecting to the closure, it wraps that message neatly in "instructions" of how the closure should have been handled. It was signed by Senators Webb and Warner, and House members Nye, Scott, Forbes and Wittman.
_______________________________________________________

"Dear Secretary Gates,

"We write to express our deep disappointment and concern over your recommendation to President Obama to eliminate the U.S. Joint Forces Command. Should he approve your proposal, a number of substantial negative consequences will result, including the future erosion of our military's joint warfighting capabilities, the dismissal of thousands of highly skilled civilian federal employees and defense contractors, and a significant adverse economic impact in the Hampton Roads region.


"Furthermore, we are deeply troubled by your lack of prior consultation with Congress on this matter and your apparent strategy to eliminate the command without complying with the provisions of Title 10 U.S. Code, Section 2687 or, alternatively, to propose the command's elimination be considered as part of a Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) process.

"Congress has played a leading oversight role to improve our military's joint warfare capabilities dating to passage of the Goldwater-Nichols Department of Defense Reorganization Act of 1986. Congress was moved to act due to significant shortcomings in joint operations, training, doctrine, and communications revealed during U.S. military operations in the 1980s.


"Guided by the recommendations of the Packard Commission and a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Goldwater-Nichols bill resulted in the most significant reorganization of DoD since the National Security Act of 1947.

"JFCOM's mission embodies all that Senator Goldwater, Congressman Nichols, and their colleagues envisioned nearly 25 years ago when they led the way to ensure that all branches of our armed forces would be able to fight as an integrated joint team when they go to war. Alone among the U.S. combatant commands, JFCOM is uniquely organized and tasked to develop the joint training, doctrine, and capabilities needed to adjust to the demands of 21st-century combat operations. The command also plays a key role in balancing joint warfighting programmatic requirements with the individual service programs advocated by each military department.


"We are also troubled that your recommendation appears to rely upon the findings of a recent Defense Business Board report. Although that report was wide-reaching in its scope, we question the thoroughness of its analysis of JFCOM, its functions, or its operations. According to JFCOM, the Board did not visit the command, request a briefing or any other information, or provide an opportunity to review and comment on the board's findings and recommendations. As yet, we have received no detailed information on the basis for the board's recommendation.


"All 24 official and ex-officio members of the board have had long, distinguished careers in the corporate world, including defense industries. Several are also members of defense advisory panels or have served as senior civilian officials in DoD or other federal agencies.

"Only a handful has actually served in uniform and, with the exception of one member, their military service occurred early in their lives. No board member has commanded forces in combat operations in Iraq or Afghanistan-where the imperative for seamless joint operations has been demonstrated repeatedly.


"Needless to say, it is deeply disturbing that that you would apparently act on a recommendation that reflects superficial research and a lack of analytical rigor.

JFCOM Emblem

"It is worth noting that the 2005 BRAC process reviewed and validated JFCOM's mission and contributions to joint warfighting. The DoD panel reviewing the command also recommended that JFCOM purchase its leased spaces to support its permanent presence. As recently as October 2009, JFCOM opened a new 49,000-square-foot Joint Deployment Center and Maritime Operations Center that it shares with the Navy's Fleet Forces Command. This state-of-the-art technological facility enables the two commands to direct maritime operations and collaborate with joint, interagency, and multinational partners as part of their respective missions.


"Unlike the Defense Business Board's cursory review, several in-depth studies each assessed joint force effectiveness and requirements to improve combat capability, and all reached a different conclusion than the DBB. None of these comprehensive reviews recommended the elimination or realignment of JFCOM. On the contrary, they recommended placing increased emphasis on joint warfighting. One of the 2009 Quadrennial Roles and Missions Review's primary objectives was to 'improve the effectiveness of joint and interagency operations.' The 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review stated: "Perhaps more than ever before, the United States requires joint military forces able to function and across a wide geographic and operational spectrum. Moreover, military forces must be capable of working effectively with a range of civilian and international partners."

"Finally, we object to your plan to ignore the legislative intent associated with base closure and realignment limitations associated with Title 10 U.S. Code, Section 2687. This provision was established to ensure that Congress has sufficient time and opportunity to review DoD proposals that would result in the closure or realignment of significant facilities. It also includes requirements intended to ensure that such decisions are made only after a comprehensive review of costs, impacts, and alternatives.

"Although compliance with 10 USC 2687 would result in only a few months' delay in implementation of your recommendation to eliminate JFCOM, your closure strategy appears to have been crafted to avoid the need to comply with its statutory requirements. A clause in the section allows for workload reductions that do not count against the realignment limitation, but we are informed by legal counsel that the department's reliance on it in this instance is clearly in violation of the legislative intent of this law.


"It would set the unacceptable precedent that DoD could close or realign any installation without compliance with the section. Furthermore, JFCOM occupies a major leased facility in Suffolk, Virginia, that should not be considered part of Naval Station Norfolk or any other military installation.

"Your JFCOM recommendation also would result in the closure of this facility, thus requiring compliance with 10 USC 2687.


"We recognize that the department has not, in recent history, applied 10 USC 2687 for base closures and realignments. Instead, the Congress and the department have reached major decisions on military installations through the Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) process. BRAC was crafted to avoid political interference and to ensure that decisions are made only after complete and impartial reviews of impacts, costs, savings, and alternatives.

"As you know, the last BRAC round was conducted in 2005, and its actions are nearing completion next year. Eliminating the Joint Forces Command poses significant implications for the future conduct of joint operations, entails financial and personnel costs, and will result in a substantial adverse economic impact on the local community. We believe that your recommendation to close JFCOM would more appropriately be considered within the context of a BRAC process. We understand that you have "authorized each of the military departments to consider consolidation or closure of excess bases and other facilities where appropriate." This guidance, coupled with the failure to adhere to the legislative intent of 10 USC 2687 and your intent to conduct base closures or realignments outside of the BRAC process, is cause for concern.


"We continue to support your efforts to reduce costs and eliminate waste and duplication within the Department of Defense. However, it is of the utmost importance that decisions relating to base realignments and closures are considered within an established and authorized process.

"As such, we urge you to conduct a more complete review of JFCOM's mission and activities without a predisposed intent to close the command. Any recommendation to close JFCOM should only be made as part of a BRAC or 10 USC 2687 process."

  _______________________________________________________________________________
Publisher's note: We continue mystified, amid all of the "cost containment" concerns, that despite the existence of a truly elegant and effective means of forever changing Congressional defense acquisition processes, as fastidiously outlined by Walsh College Director MBA/Management Programs and national security strategist Dr. Sheila R. Ronis in the November 2004 Defense AT&L analysis "Transformational Recapitalization: Rethinking USAF Aircraft Procurement Philosophies" http://www.dau.mil/pubscats/PubsCats/atl/2004_11_12/rons-nd04.pdf     the DoD and Congress  remain captive to outdated and ineffective acquisition strategies.

Related links: http://www.ndu.edu/inss/Symposia/2010_Economic_Security_Symposium/Web_Pages/index.htm
http://pnsr.org/data/files/project_on_national_security_reform_vwg.pdf

Sukhoi SU-35         Image: Russian Air Force

2009/2010 Auto Industry Analysis: GM's TRANSITION TO CHINA (6) eMOTION! REPORTS.com

2009/2010 Auto Industry Analysis: GM's TRANSITION TO CHINA (6) eMOTION! REPORTS.com

View more documents from eMOTION! REPORTS.com.

From this analysis:           

 As its presence grew, the evidences of China’s dubious human history were there to be seen by anyone who looked. Visions of the country’s forced one-child family policy, detention centers for those citizens seeking redress from corrupt officials, the Stalin-esque elimination of millions of elderly no longer able to work --aerial photographic evidence of the horror still marked as ’ classified’ in U.S. State Department/DoD archives -- (note: eyewitness accounts include those of contract air cargo personnel for the US military who reported “rivers choked bank to bank with bodies of the old and infirm, hands tied behind their backs, as far as the eye could see at our radar avoiding’ flight level and line of sight of seven miles. We used high-resolution cameras in our PBY to document these observations, with a death toll estimate partially corroborated by the Red Cross and other capable people of at least 70 Million’ ) in the days following Mao Zhedong’s ouster of Chiang Kai-Shek to Formosa in 1949, or college students who protested were avoidable if one looked in a different direction. Also ignored was China’s blatant disregard for anyone else’s property or intellectual property rights. (It was GM’s vice chair Bob Lutz who had noticed a Jeep driving around the streets of Beijing during a much earlier visit during his tenure with Chrysler. His Chinese host proudly announced it wasn’t a Jeep, but a successful copy of the Jeep, down to every detail.)

Consolidated PBY Catalina Flying Boat of The Type That Discovered Mao Zhe-Dong Ordered Atrocity Against Old and Infirm Chinese Citizens - Inclusive of the Complete Depopulating of Shanghai - Following the Ouster of Nationalist Forces under Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek in 1949 Image: United States Navy

From the press release:                       

6. Reveals, based on still classified data and imagery within US State Department and Department of Defense (DoD) archives, that Mao Zhedong, in a move echoing that of Josef Stalin, ordered the extermination of old and infirm Chinese he deemed unable to work in the aftermath of his defeat of the nationalist forces of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-Shek in 1949. The number of those killed in the days and weeks transpiring subsequent to order issuance, at least 70 million and as high as 120 million, exceeds by several orders of magnitude the known estimates in the 1949-1976 timeframe which included “The Great Leap Forward”. It is worth noting the higher estimate at the time represented half of the population of the United States. (note: Eyewitness accounts include those of contract Air Cargo personnel for the US military who reported ’rivers choked bank to bank with bodies of the old and infirm, hands tied with wire behind their backs, as far as the eye could see at our radar avoiding’ flight level and line of sight of seven miles. We used high-resolution cameras in our [Consolidated] PBY [Catalina Flying Boat] to document these observations, with a death toll estimate partially corroborated by the Red Cross and other capable people of at least 70 Million. We chanced upon this horrific scene while flying along the coast over the East China Sea not far from Shanghai, when we observed at least a thousand sharks headed inland. Having no idea what would be bringing the sharks in, we flew lower for a closer look and followed them up a river for approximately five or six miles to a sight we will never forget: a massive feeding frenzy on human victims.’)


mstokes@emotionreports.com
http://www.emotionreports.com/
248-809-1905