Verbatim Mac - National Speech and Debate Association



December Topic UpdateBy: Dustin Rimmey, Topeka High School, KansasResolved: The United States federal government should substantially reduce Direct Commercial Sales and/or Foreign Military Sales of arms from the United States.Summary: Here is a random (yet organized) file full of updates to answer things like DIB, Circumvention, Politics, and some Saudi UpdatesTable of Contents TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u December Topic Update PAGEREF _Toc27470598 \h 1Assurances/Asian Alliances PAGEREF _Toc27470599 \h 3Japan-Soko Angst PAGEREF _Toc27470600 \h 4Circumvention Updates PAGEREF _Toc27470601 \h 7Circumvention Answers—Nuts and Bolts PAGEREF _Toc27470602 \h 8Circumvention—Nuts and Bolts PAGEREF _Toc27470603 \h 9Defense Stocks—Both Ways PAGEREF _Toc27470604 \h 10Aff--Defense Stocks UQ PAGEREF _Toc27470605 \h 11Neg--Defense Stocks UQ PAGEREF _Toc27470606 \h 12Neg—Lockheed Martin Scenario PAGEREF _Toc27470607 \h 13DIB—Affirmative PAGEREF _Toc27470608 \h 17Decline Inevitable PAGEREF _Toc27470609 \h 18Growth Inevitable PAGEREF _Toc27470610 \h 19Impact Turn--Econ-Security Strat Bad PAGEREF _Toc27470611 \h 24DIB—Negative PAGEREF _Toc27470612 \h 26US Arms Sales Up PAGEREF _Toc27470613 \h 27Reform the DIB CP Solvency PAGEREF _Toc27470614 \h 28Impeachment Updates PAGEREF _Toc27470615 \h 30Impeachment—Not Gonna Happen PAGEREF _Toc27470616 \h 31NDAA Internal Links PAGEREF _Toc27470617 \h 33Internal Link—Space Force PAGEREF _Toc27470618 \h 34Internal Link—Paid Family Leave PAGEREF _Toc27470619 \h 36Internal Link—Turkey Sanctions PAGEREF _Toc27470620 \h 37Internal Link—Increased Ukraine Sales PAGEREF _Toc27470621 \h 38Internal Link—North Korea Sanctions PAGEREF _Toc27470622 \h 39Internal Link—SoKo Drawdown PAGEREF _Toc27470623 \h 40Internal Link—Hypersonic Technology PAGEREF _Toc27470624 \h 41Internal Link—Election Security PAGEREF _Toc27470625 \h 42Internal Link—Laundry List PAGEREF _Toc27470626 \h 43Internal Link--CR Bad for Defense PAGEREF _Toc27470627 \h 44Russia Fill-In—Both Ways PAGEREF _Toc27470628 \h 46Neg Updates PAGEREF _Toc27470629 \h 47Aff--Impact Takeout PAGEREF _Toc27470630 \h 48Saudi Affirmative Updates PAGEREF _Toc27470631 \h 49AT—Houthis are Proxys PAGEREF _Toc27470632 \h 50The Florida Shooter (Training Missions)--Links PAGEREF _Toc27470633 \h 51USMCA—Both Ways PAGEREF _Toc27470634 \h 52It’s Dead PAGEREF _Toc27470635 \h 53Mexico Approved the Changes PAGEREF _Toc27470636 \h 55It’s Still a Thing PAGEREF _Toc27470637 \h 56Assurances/Asian AlliancesJapan-Soko AngstJapan and South Korea are fighting now, the US needs to give strong assurances to their alliesBonnie S. Glaser and Oriana Skylar Mastro, 9-9-2019, "How an Alliance System Withers," Foreign Affairs, latest round of?friction?between South Korea and Japan began in the halls of South Korea’s supreme court. In the fall of 2018, the court ordered three Japanese companies to compensate South Koreans who claimed that they had been used as forced laborers in World War II. Tokyo, however, maintains that any claims to reparations for wartime abuses were settled by the $800 million in economic aid and loans it paid Seoul under a 1965 treaty. In March 2019, South Korean shop owners organized a nationwide boycott of Japanese goods. In response, the Japanese government restricted exports of three important chemicals used in the South Korean semiconductor industry, which accounts for a quarter of South Korea’s total exports. Japan also removed South Korea from its whitelist of preferred trading partners. Seoul responded in kind and went a step further, pulling out of a new intelligence-sharing agreement that had taken years to negotiate. Chinese policymakers have recognized the rift between Seoul and Tokyo as a godsend. Fractures between two crucial U.S. allies make it harder for Washington to form a united front in peacetime or in a potential crisis. Such disunity also benefits China when it comes to dealing with North Korea, the nuclear-armed pariah state on its border. Here, Beijing favors sanctions relief, diplomatic engagement, and various economic inducements. So, too, does the current government of South Korea, but its space for engagement has been restricted by Washington and Tokyo, who prefer a more hawkish approach. Now, with the tripartite partnership under stress, China could try to make common cause with South Korea, disrupting Washington’s and Tokyo’s efforts to pursue hard-line policies. The effects of the nascent Japanese–South Korean trade war on China less are less clear-cut. Tit-for-tat economic retaliation could set back negotiations on a free-trade agreement between China, Japan, and South Korea, which Beijing has been promoting for years. But China could still capitalize on the economic fallout of the current dispute, particularly Japan’s decision to restrict the sale to South Korea of three chemicals used to produce microchips. South Korea’s valuable electronics industry, including the manufacturing giant Samsung, relies on these imports for its production. Companies will have to look for alternative suppliers, and China, which also produces the chemicals in question, can step in to fill the gap. The latest round of trade restrictions by Japan, in effect since August 28, may cause similar disruptions in other sectors of the South Korean economy, potentially increasing South Korea’s?economic reliance?on Chinese exports. This dependence, in turn, could make South Korean more vulnerable to economic coercion, a tool Beijing has not hesitated to use in the past.China is exploiting Japan-SoKo tensions to turn them vs the USBonnie S. Glaser and Oriana Skylar Mastro, 9-9-2019, "How an Alliance System Withers," Foreign Affairs, ’s ultimate goal in exploiting the Japanese-South Korean feud is not as straightforward as it seems. Beijing wants tensions to escalate enough to undermine the U.S. alliance system in Asia, but it does not want the relationship between Seoul and Tokyo to sour to the point of complete estrangement. It just aspires for that relationship to be tethered to Beijing, not Washington. From its goal of a three-way free trade agreement to its vision for the Korean Peninsula, China wants to be at the center of its neighbors’ foreign policy considerations. Such a rebalancing of priorities and power in East Asia would put the U.S. regional position at serious risk. Yet China has been smart not to overplay its hand. So far, it hasn’t openly courted South Korea to abandon its alliance with the United States or launched its own campaign to punish Japan for World War II atrocities. Instead, it has tried to cast the tensions between Japan and South Korea as evidence of poor U.S. leadership—if the United States cannot serve as an effective mediator between its allies, what good is it?—and present itself as a proactive peacemaker and more reliable partner than the United States. Earlier this year, Qiu Guohong, the Chinese ambassador to South Korea, called for the two countries to work together to counter protectionism and unilateralism, a veiled reference to the Trump administration’s foreign and trade policies. Stronger Sino–South Korean ties, Qiu said, would show other U.S. allies in the region the benefits of protecting themselves from excessive U.S. interference in their domestic and foreign policy decisions. Strong U.S.-led alliances in East Asia have provided peace and security for more than half a century. Until recently, Chinese opposition to those alliances did not make them any less robust. But fraying ties between Tokyo and Seoul could embolden Beijing to seek to reshape the regional balance of power to its advantage. Some say that the Trump administration lost its chance to fix things by failing to get involved sooner. Perhaps, but given that the post–World War II regional order is at stake, the administration must redouble its efforts to ameliorate ties between Japan and South Korea.The US needs to offer strong assurances to settle disputes between Japan and South KoreaCeleste L. Arrington and Andrew Yeo, 7-31-2019, "Japan and South Korea Can’t Get Along," Foreign Affairs, Japanese–South Korean feud should concern the United States. A trade war between the two countries could hurt the U.S. economy, given the?importance?of South Korean electronics manufacturers to the global supply chain. But the greater danger is that of normalizing the use of trade policy to resolve unconnected diplomatic disputes. Washington should denounce the export restrictions and boycotts and encourage both sides to compromise on the question of wartime compensation. Unfortunately, U.S. President Donald Trump’s own weaponization of trade policy gives him little credibility in this regard. The rift between Seoul and Tokyo cannot go unaddressed, however—not least because it undermines the United States’ ability to pursue a coherent strategy toward North Korea. Any successful negotiation between Washington and Pyongyang will require Japan and South Korea to cooperate with the United States—and with each other—on issues such as enforcing sanctions against North Korea. Seoul’s threat to withdraw from its intelligence-sharing agreement with Tokyo is particularly troubling in this regard, as the loss of coordination among intelligence services in East Asia would make tracking shared threats, such as North Korean missile tests, very difficult for the United States. Japan and South Korea are the strongest anchors of the U.S. alliance system in Asia. If they are unable to work together and present a united front against China and North Korea, Beijing will have a golden opportunity to increase its regional influence and Pyongyang may exploit divisions among U.S. partners. For this reason, resolving the dispute between the two countries should be a high priority for the Trump Administration in the pursuit of its broader strategy to “uphold stability and prosperity” and reinforce a “rules-based order” in the Indo-Pacific. Yet so far the Trump administration has sent mixed signals about its intentions. Earlier this month, the U.S. ambassador in Seoul urged Japan and South Korea to resolve their differences among themselves. A few weeks later, Bolton and other senior officials flew out to Asia—but once there, they offered no indication of the U.S. position on the matter. Instead, Bolton discussed cooperating on security near Iran and the need for Tokyo and Seoul to contribute more to their alliances with the United States. Ratcheting down tensions will take leadership and sustained effort from Seoul and Tokyo. But Washington can help, too. As it has done in the past, it should work behind the scenes and avoid publicly taking sides. Specifically, the United States should urge Seoul to agree to settle its compensation claims through neutral, third-party arbitration and advise Japan not to go forward with trade restrictions. Trump has often expressed skepticism about U.S. alliances, but he should recognize that U.S. strategy in East Asia depends on continued Japanese–South Korean cooperation. To abdicate its role in preserving that cooperation would hurt the United States as much as its allies.Circumvention UpdatesCircumvention Answers—Nuts and BoltsAll BPC Programs are authorized through a FMS FrameworkDefense Security Cooperation Agency, No Date, "Chapter 15," No Publication, Partner Capacity (BPC) programs encompass security cooperation and security assistance activities that are funded with U.S. Government (USG) appropriations and administered as cases within the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) infrastructure. These programs may provide defense articles and/or services to other USG departments and agencies under the authority of the Economy Act or other transfer authorities for the purpose of building the capacity of partner nation security forces and enhancing their capability to conduct counterterrorism, counter drug, and counterinsurgency operations, or to support U.S. military and stability operations, multilateral peace operations, and other programs. They are crucial tools used by the Department of Defense (DoD) and other USG agencies in furtherance of U.S. national security objectives. To enable BPC program execution through existing security assistance automated systems, the DoD Implementing Agency (IA) develops a pseudo Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) in the Defense Security Assistance Management System (DSAMS). The pseudo LOA is not signed by the partner nation that will ultimately receive the articles and/or services, but serves to document the transfer of articles and services to the USG Requesting Authority.A Shift to the CCL would be solved through ending DCS it’s the same processNational Defense Industrial Association, 2019, "Foreign Military Sales Vs Direct Commercial Sales," No Publication, for an export license through DCS is based on how a product or service is categorized. The State Department’s Directorate of Defense Trade Controls (DDTC) executes authority in issuing export licenses to all defense related products and services on the U.S. Munitions List (USML), pursuant to the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). The Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) grants export licenses to more commercial and “dual-use” defense products and services on the Commerce Control List (CCL), pursuant to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR). Like the FMS program, DCS advances interoperability between the U.S military and its allies.?Furthermore, foreign countries use FMF funding to purchase U.S. defense products and systems through both the FMS program and, on occasion, the DCS process.Circumvention—Nuts and BoltsBPC Programs Fall under DOD and FMS Funded ProcessesDefense Security Cooperation Agency, No Date, "Directorate of Building Partnership Capacity (BPC)," No Publication, Directorate of Building Partnership Capacity (BPC) is responsible for managing the execution of a wide array of Title 10 and Title 22 programs, and integrating those programs into solutions that contribute to the accomplishment of national security objectives. These programs are designed to advance partner nation capacity and capabilities through the provision of training and equipment, and include a series of Title 10 humanitarian-based programs that provides DoD the ability to accomplish national security objectives through military-civilian engagement. ?BPC is organized into four divisions comprising a mix of DOD, FMF, and FMS funded personnel.Defense Stocks—Both WaysAff--Defense Stocks UQDefense stocks are lackluster nowAparajita Dutta, 12-5-2019, "Defense Stock Roundup: GD Wins Big Deal, CW Boosts Buyback Program," Zacks Investment Research, . defense stocks witnessed a moderate flow of funds from the Pentagon over the trailing five trading sessions. While this had sufficient potential to keep the aerospace and defense industry buoyant, turmoil in the broader market was a spoiler. On Dec 3, U.S. stocks declined with major market indices sliding downward,after President Trump hinted at a delay in trade talk with China. Although latest media reports suggesting a possible U.S.-China trade talk resumption cheered the Wall Street on Dec 4, the overall market’s performance over the past five trading sessions has been disappointing. Consequently, major indices of the aerospace and defense industry put up a dismal show. Notably, the S&P 500 Aerospace &Defense (Industry) Index fell 3.7%, while the Dow Jones U.S. Aerospace & DefenseIndex slipped 3.2% in the past five trading sessions.Neg--Defense Stocks UQDefense stocks are safe bets into the futureKyle Woodley, Senior Investing Editor, Kiplinger, 12-5-2019, "The 10 Best Index Funds to Buy and Hold," InvestorPlace, Aerospace & Defense Portfolio (PPA) Type: Sector (Defense) Expenses: 0.59% The PowerShares Aerospace & Defense Portfolio (NYSEARCA:PPA) is one of two ideal ways to play the defense space broadly. The other is the iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF (NYSEARCA:ITA), and frankly, I think it’s a toss-up between the pair. It just depends on what you’re looking for. Both are heavy in many of the same stocks, such as Boeing Co (NYSE:BA) and United Technologies Corporation (NYSE:UTX). The price advantage goes to the iShares fund, which is cheaper by 0.17 percentage points. However, PPA is a better choice if you’re looking for more diversification. Defense stocks are clobbering the market. This isn’t a hidden trade. Frankly, I think new money should consider waiting for the next sizable market dip to knock some of the froth off before buying either of these ETFs. But defense will rule for the foreseeable future. Thus, PPA and ITA will, too.Neg—Lockheed Martin ScenarioLockheed’s stock is strong and stable for 3 reasons: product portfolio, cash flow, and bargain price. – Plan reverses all of these Joe Tenebruso, 5-20-2019, "3 Great Reasons to Buy Lockheed Martin Stock," Motley Fool, Martin (NYSE:LMT) is off to a strong start in 2019. The world's largest defense contractor has seen its stock price rally about 30% so far this year, following its strong first-quarter results. Still, plenty more gains could still lie ahead for investors. Here's why. 1. A strong product portfolio At the core of Lockheed Martin's portfolio lies the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. It is one of the Department of Defense's most important programs, as the multi-role aircraft is designed to be the most advanced strike aircraft for the Air Force, Navy, and Marines. The F-35 is so important to the nation's security, in fact, that it's unlikely the Defense Department will let the program fail. Instead, the F-35 is almost certain to remain a core part of the U.S. military's -- and many of our allies' -- air defense plans for decades to come. Thus, Lockheed Martin is likely to enjoy a level of revenue stability and visibility that few other businesses experience. Yet Lockheed Martin is far more than just a one-trick pony. The F-35 accounts for about 30% of the company's revenue. The rest is derived from other businesses such as missile, helicopter, and satellite systems -- all of which are seeing rising demand from the military. Lockheed Martin is particularly adept at hypersonics, or weapons that travel at least five times the speed of sound. With China and Russia having formidable technology in this area, the U.S. military has made hypersonic technology a focus area. Thus, Lockheed Martin is likely to enjoy strong demand for its hypersonic missile and missile-defense systems in the years ahead. All told, Lockheed Martin ended the first quarter with a backlog of more than $130 billion, including some of the military's most important programs. This puts the country's leading defense company on solid footing to deliver strong revenue and earnings growth in the coming decade. 2. Bountiful cash flow and capital returns Better still, Lockheed Martin is becoming more profitable as it expands its revenue base. The company's consolidated operating margin improved to 15.9% in the first quarter, up from 14.8% in the prior-year period. In turn, Lockheed Martin produced a whopping $1.7 billion in operating cash flow, up from $630 million in the first quarter of 2018. That allowed Lockheed Martin to return more than $900 million to shareholders via dividends and share repurchases in the first quarter alone. The stock currently yields 2.48% -- tops among major defense companies: 3. A bargain price Despite its strong product portfolio, massive backlog, and strong cash flow production, Lockheed Martin trades at a discount to the average S&P 500 stock. The leading defense contractor currently trades for 13.6 times forward earnings estimates, compared to more than 17 times estimates for the S&P 500. While defense stocks tend to trade at lower price-to-earnings multiples than the broader market due to the cyclical nature of their business, I find Lockheed Martin's valuation attractive during a time when many other high-quality businesses have seen their P/E multiples expand to unjustifiable levels as the market has reached new highs. Moreover, Lockheed Martin is trading at an even more attractive price when factoring in its expected long-term earnings growth rate. Analysts predict that the defense giant will increase its profits by 14% annually over the next five years. Although that may seem high for a defense stock, analysts expect the U.S. military's high-priority projects -- such as the F-35 and hypersonic missile defense systems -- to drive above-average growth for Lockheed Martin over the next half-decade. That puts Lockheed Martin's forward price-to-earnings-to-growth, or PEG, ratio at less than 1, which indicates an undervalued stock. Investors may wish to use this opportunity to buy shares of this best-in-class defense company at a bargain price.The Defense sector, and specifically Lockheed Martain, are strong and stable now. Josh Terlich, 12-08-2019, "Going on the defensive: the defence sector stays strong," Livewire Markets, week we touched briefly on a couple of Aussie defence stocks and how global defence industry spending generally does not wane even during economic slowdowns. This makes sense particularly recently where there is a notable increase in geopolitical tensions and a constant tug-of-war between some of the world's superpowers. Governments the world over continue to plough money into their defence capabilities, and this looks set to continue. Australian defence stocks have benefited hugely - highlighted by the price rises in Austal (ASX:ASB) and Codan (ASX:CDA). Comparatively speaking though, the Australian defence 'manufacturing' sector is small with behemoths such as Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics dominating the global landscape. In this note we take a further look into a few stocks to understand exactly what they do - Electro Optic Systems (ASX:EOS) and Lockheed Martin (NYSE:LMT). EOS is no start-up and following a stellar price rise now has a market cap of ~AU$770m. The company offers a 'two for one' deal with a hand in both the defence and aerospace sectors. EOS specialises in remote weapons systems (such as that pictured on top of the army vehicle below) but also telescopes, domed observatories, laser satellite tracking and missile defence systems on the aerospace side. EOS's field weapon systems are aimed at reducing casualties with the capability of being fired remotely from within the armoured vehicle or from other unmanned platforms. The company has customers in Australia, Singapore, Germany, and importantly, with the US. It has a contract with Lockheed Martin (which is the largest defence contractor in the US) - to jointly develop space tracking sensors. The largest shareholder of EOS is Northrup Grumman - which is a giant in the defence/aerospace industry (with a market cap of ~US$58bn) - currently holding an 8.2% stake. The importance of these strategic partnerships can't be underestimated. FY 2018 was a standout year, with revenues more than tripling, rising from AU$23m to AU$86m. Net profit went from a $9m loss to a $15m gain. According to the company, demand for the company's products and services has gone gangbusters with an estimated backlog of confirmed orders and contracts expected to swell to AU$630m by 31 December 2019. Pipeline of tenders and contracts under negotiation are developing rapidly. EOS expects to convert this pipeline to around AU$2bn of contract awards for current products over the next three years to December 2022. Whilst Boeing is a bigger overall company (market cap of ~US$200bn), Lockheed Martin is the biggest defence company on the planet (market cap of ~US$110bn) specialising in arms production. Calendar year 2018 saw the company rake in close to US$60bn in revenues. The centre piece of the company's arsenal is the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The flagship warplane famous the world over will form a key component for the US Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps, as well as around a dozen other nations' defence capabilities for decades to come.The F-35 is projected to remain in service until at least 2070. Over the next 50 years or so the JSF program is expected to generate well over US$1 trillion in revenue for Lockheed globally, which are mind boggling numbers and gives the reader an idea of the pay-offs involved in the defence game. Lockheed has plenty more in the bag than just the F-35. From combat ships to hypersonic missiles, helicopters and spacecraft, LMT remains the world's top weapons manufacturer. In 2018, LMT secured both of the US Pentagon's hypersonic weapons contracts, capitalising on the recent spending spree the US government has been embarking on (which is in addition to the delivery of the F-35 program - America's most expensive weapons system at US$400bn). The US and other nations have 3,100 F-35s on order through 2035, making Lockheed possibly one of the better defence stocks for steady, long-term revenue. Sales of the jet currently make up ~25% of LMT's revenues. According to experts, the company has the industry's top portfolio of products, and exposure to multiple areas where US Pentagon budgets should grow for years to come. It has a seat at the table for every discussion involving a Pentagon priority, and should win at least its fair share of new business for a very long time. Although many of the aforementioned stocks have seen some incredible rallies in the last 12 months, there may be more to come but investors should delve carefully into pipelines and customer bases. LMT for example trades at a premium to its peers as it has large exposure to US spending and a pipeline extending for almost 5 decades. Ending arm sales to Saudi Arabia would deck Lockheed Martin’s stocksAmanda Macias, 3-4-2019, “Pentagon awards Lockheed Martin nearly $1 billion for Saudi missile system deal,” CNBC, — The Pentagon awarded Lockheed Martin $946 million on behalf of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia for the defense giants’ THAAD missile defense system, the Defense Department announced Monday. The multi-million dollar award is the first installment of what is expected to be a $15 billion deal. In November, CNBC learned that Saudi Arabia signed a letter of offer and acceptance with the United States for Lockheed Martin’s THAAD missile system, a significant step forward in the $15 billion deal. Saudi officials, alongside their U.S. counterparts, signed the crucial government-to-government agreement on November 26, paving the way for the massive sale of 44 THAAD launchers, missiles and related equipment. Manufactured by Lockheed Martin, the Pentagon’s top weapons supplier, THAAD, or terminal high altitude area defense, is regarded as America’s crown jewel in missile defense systems. The development came as Saudi Arabia faced scrutiny over the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi, as well as its role in the war in Yemen. President Donald Trump, meanwhile, has cited the importance of defense deals in defending his decision to stick with the kingdom in the aftermath of the slaying. Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman has denied knowledge of the attack, although the CIA reportedly concluded that he ordered Khashoggi’s death. Saudi Arabia’s oil-rich monarchy is one of America’s most crucial strategic partners and a significant patron of U.S. defense companies. The Saudis are the top buyers of U.S.-made arms, a title that has safeguarded the kingdom from retaliatory sanctions over the killing of Khashoggi and the war in Yemen. Saudi Arabia and the U.S. entered formal discussions for THAAD in December 2016.Ending arm sales to Taiwan would deck Lockheed Martin’s stocksLockheed Martin, ND, "Taiwan," Lockheed Martin, For the past 30 years, the Republic of China Air Force (ROCAF) has defended its skies with Lockheed Martin products starting with F-104 Starfighters and continuing today with the F-16A/B MLU Block 20 Fighting Falcon. But, Lockheed Martin’s history with Taiwan goes beyond delivering advanced programs and capabilities. The Corporation was also the first defense contractor to establish an Industrial Cooperation (IC) Agreement with Taiwan’s Industrial Development Bureau (IBD), providing new technologies, know-how, and capabilities to local industry. Major programs in Taiwan include: Indigenous Defense Fighter (IDF) Lockheed Martin helped design and produce Taiwan’s first and only fly-by-wire advanced fighter. C-130H Taiwan’s Republic of China Air Force has purchased 20 C-130Hs from the United States Air Force. P-3 The Taiwan Navy obtained 12 P-3C aircraft under the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales program in 2007 which were then modernized to provide an additional 15,000 flight hours. Sharpshooter Targeting Pods and Pathfinder Navigation Pods Taiwan’s F-16s utilize these systems to pinpoint targets in challenging conditions, including total darkness and poor weather. Radars From GE-592 solid-state 3D radar to the TPS-117, Lockheed Martin has a proud history of providing a variety of radars to Taiwan. Air Traffic Control The Taiwan Navy obtained 12 P-3C aircraft under the U.S. government’s Foreign Military Sales program in 2007 which were then modernized to provide an additional 15,000 flight hours. ROC Navy PFG-2 Frigate Lockheed Martin has worked with the ROC Navy since 1986 building and operating Taiwan’s first indigenous warship. From training support to air-to-air missiles, Lockheed Martin is a proud partner for the PFG-2 Frigate.Taiwan accounts for over 10% of Lockheed Martin’s BC, 8-20-2019, “US State Department approves possible $8 billion fighter jet sale to Taiwan,” U.S. State Department has approved a possible $8 billion sale of F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan, the Defense Security Cooperation Agency said on Tuesday in an official notification to Congress. The potential deal is for 66 aircraft, 75 General Electric engines, as well as other systems, the agency said in a statement, adding it served the interests of the United States and would help Taiwan maintain a credible defense. China has already denounced the widely discussed sale, one of the biggest yet by the United States to Taiwan, which Beijing considers a renegade province. It has warned of unspecified “countermeasures.” Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch, a Republican, has welcomed the proposed sale of the Lockheed Martin Corp F-16 jets. “These fighters are critical to improving Taiwan’s ability to defend its sovereign airspace, which is under increasing pressure from the People’s Republic of China,” he said in a recent statement. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told Fox News on Monday that President Donald Trump notified Congress of the sale last week. Pompeo told Fox News the sale was “consistent with past U.S. policy” and that the United States was “simply following through on the commitments we’ve made to all of the parties.” In Taipei, President Tsai Ing-wen said the sale would help Taiwan build a new air force and boost its air defense capacity. In a post on Facebook, Tsai said she was grateful for Washington’s “continuous support for Taiwan’s national defense”. “With strong self-defense capacity, Taiwan will certainly be more confident to ensure the cross-strait and regional peace and stability while facing security challenges,” she said. Taiwan unveiled its largest defense spending increase in more than a decade last week, amid rising military tensions with China.Ending arm sales to Ukraine would deck Lockheed Martin’s stocks.Jacqueline Feldscher, 10-01-2019, "State Department greenlights new missile sale for Ukraine," State Department has approved a new sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine for $39 million to help deter Russia, just days after the request played a role in initiating the impeachment inquiry of President Donald Trump. The approval, which has not yet been made public but was confirmed by a Senate Foreign Relations Committee aide, comes amid concerns that Trump withheld separate military aid to Kiev this summer to compel Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter. Story Continued Below Zelensky asked Trump for the Javelins during a July 25 phone call, to which the president responded by asking for a “favor" and reiterating his request for Ukraine to investigate his political rival. Story Continued Below The conversation took place a week after Trump ordered the Pentagon and State Department to halt all military aid to Ukraine, over the objections of both departments and his national security team. The new arms deal, which includes 150 of the portable tank-busting weapons made by a joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, has been in the works since before that. The U.S. Embassy in Ukraine announced that Ukraine requested the weapons on July 7. The transaction, which was first reported by Bloomberg, follows the sale of 210 missiles and 37 launchers in March 2018 for $47 million. A State Department spokesperson said that the department won't "comment on or confirm potential defense sales and transfers until they have been formally notified to Congress." Congress has 30 days to object once it receives official notification. The Javelins have played a central role in the steady U.S. effort to provide military support and training to the Ukrainians since the Russian invasion of the Crimean Peninsula in 2014. In addition to the weapons sales, the United States has provided $1.5 billion in military assistance to Ukraine between 2014 and June 2019, according to an updated analysis from the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service. DIB—AffirmativeDecline InevitableDIB Decline inevitable due to lack of federal direction and a loss of immigrant talentAaron Mehta and Joe Gould, 12-5-2019, "Here are five ambitious steps to grow the defense innovation base and challenge China," Defense News, VALLEY, Calif. — If the U.S. military intends to technologically keep pace with China, now is the time to invest in the long-term health of the defense industrial base, including creating a new national guard-esque unit for technology and adding a special visa program, a new report warns. Put out ahead of the Reagan National Defense Forum, the new report by the Reagan Foundation found that the U.S. national security innovation base (NSIB) suffers from a lack of direction from the federal government, a loss of talent to other nations, an aging workforce and a lack of innovative incentives, all of which gives a centrally coordinated Chinese defense industrial base a likely edge in the future. “Competition with China need not lead to warfare or even to a policy of containment like the framework that characterized the U.S.–Soviet relationship during the Cold War. Nevertheless, it is a competition, and the side that innovates more effectively over time is likely to win,” the authors write in the report.Growth InevitableUS Arms growth inevitable—DIB Safe due to US Defense modernizationJack Guy, Cnn, 12-9-2019, "Global weapons sales up as US manufacturers dominate world market," CNN, US weapons industry saw significant consolidation in 2018 as companies look to benefit from President Donald Trump's desire to overhaul the military. "US companies are preparing for the new arms modernization program that was announced in 2017 by President Trump," said Aude Fleurant, Director of SIPRI's Arms and Military Expenditure Programme, in a statement. "Large US companies are merging to be able to produce the new generation of weapon systems and therefore be in a better position to win contracts from the US Government." Fleurant told CNN that the program encompasses major new weapons platforms, such as aircraft carriers, as well as new technologies such as artificial intelligence and hypersonic vehicles. Fleurant emphasized that there is still a chance the program doesn't go ahead in its proposed form, but if it does it will take decades to develop and test new weaponry. That said, US domination of the global arms trade looks set to continue, she added. "They've left everyone else in the dust," said Fleurant.The DOD Just released almost a billion dollars in contracts to US Defense Companies for procurementDepartment of Defense, 12-6-2019, "Contracts for December 6, 2019," U.S. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, Grumman Mission Systems, Linthicum, Maryland is awarded a $188,995,364 modification for the firm-fixed-price portion of a previously-awarded contract (M67854-19-C-0043). This modification is for the purchase of six Gallium Nitride full-rate-production systems and associated travel in support of Program Executive Officer Land Systems, Quantico, Virginia. Work will be performed in Linthicum, Maryland, and is expected to be complete by April 4, 2023. Fiscal 2020 procurement (Marine Corps) funds for $188,995,364 will be obligated at the time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The contract modification was not competitively procured. The base contract was prepared in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation 6.302-1 and 10 U.S. Code § 2304(c)(1). The Marine Corps Systems Command, Quantico, Virginia, is the contracting activity (M67854-19-C-0043).Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Co., Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded a $153,392,916 cost-plus-fixed-fee modification to a previously-awarded contract (N00019-19-C-0074). This modification procures special tooling and special test equipment required to meet current and future F-35 Lightning II low-rate initial production as well as full-rate production rates. Work will be performed in Rome, Italy (29.9%); Redondo Beach, California (24.4%); Fort Worth, Texas (21.3%); Clearfield, Utah (10.4%); Marietta, Georgia (6.9%); Samlesbury, United Kingdom (3.7%); Papendrecht, Netherlands (0.9%); Irvine, California (0.7%); Williston, Vermont (0.6%); Helena, Montana (0.5%); Kongsberg, Norway (0.4%); and Amityville, New York (0.3%), and is expected to be completed in December 2023. Fiscal 2018, 2019 and 2020 aircraft procurement (Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps); non-U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) international partners; and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) funds in the amount of $153,392,916 will be obligated at time of award, $39,892,893 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This modification combines purchases for the Air Force ($55,841,076; 36%); Navy ($51,887,772; 34%); Marine Corps ($22,286,205; 15%); non-U.S DoD international partners ($17,564,488; 11%); and FMS customers ($5,813,375; 4%). The Naval Air Systems Command, Patuxent River, Maryland, is the contracting activity.Lockheed Martin Rotary and Mission Systems, Syracuse, New York, is awarded a $21,381,819 cost-plus-incentive-fee delivery order under a previously-awarded indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract N00024-19-D-6200 for the procurement of long-lead-time material for two Virginia Block V hulls, one Virginia installation and checkout kit, one pre-production unit and associated hardware assets to support environmental qualification testing. This effort will award the procurement of Navy equipment. Work will be performed in Syracuse, New York, and is expected to be completed by December 2020. Fiscal 2019 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy) funding for $21,381,819 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity.Rockwell Collins Simulation and Training Solutions, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, is awarded a $12,819,390 modification (P00015) to a previously-awarded firm-fixed-price contract (N61340-17-C-0014) to procure additional in-scope work and technical data to refurbish and update the E-2D Hawkeye Integrated Training System-III at Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia. Work will be performed in Norfolk, Virginia, and is expected to be completed in May 2021. Fiscal 2018, 2019 and 2020 aircraft procurement (Navy-AP, N) funds in the amount of $12,819,390 will be obligated at time of award, $9,615,568 of which will expire at the end of the current fiscal year — fiscal 2018 AP, N: $9,615,568; fiscal 2019 AP, N: $1,436,802; and fiscal 2020 AP, N: $1,767,020. The Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division, Orlando, Florida, is the contracting activity.Austal USA, Mobile, Alabama, is awarded a not-to-exceed $9,198,875 fixed priced incentive firm target (FPI(F)) undefinitized contract action modification to previously-awarded contract N00024-19-C-2227 for the immediate procurement of long-lead-time material, engineering and production to support changes to the arrangement of the 02 and 03 Levels on Expeditionary Fast Transports (EPF) 13 and 14.? The EPF class provides high speed, shallow draft transportation capability to support the intra-theater maneuver of personnel, supplies and equipment for the Navy, Marine Corps and Army. Work will be performed in Mobile, Alabama, and is expected to be complete by November 2021. Fiscal 2018 and 2019 shipbuilding and conversion (Navy-SCN) funding for $4,599,438 will be obligated at time of award and will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year -- fiscal 2018 SCN (62%); and fiscal 2019 SCN (38%). The Naval Sea Systems Command, Washington, District of Columbia, is the contracting activity.Invicta Global, LLC, * Fort Worth, Texas, is awarded an $8,683,299 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract for facility support services at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, District of Columbia. The maximum dollar value including the base period and six option years is $62,498,327. The work to be performed provides for all management, supervision, labor, materials and equipment necessary to provide facility support including facility investment, facility management, integrated solid waste management and pavement clearance. Work will be performed in Washington, District of Columbia, and is expected to be completed by June 2027. No funds will be obligated at time of award. Fiscal 2020 Navy working capital fund, (Navy) contract funds for $6,732,669 for recurring work will be obligated on an individual task order issued during the base period. This contract was competitively procured via the Navy Electronic Commerce Online website with six proposals received. The Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Atlantic, Norfolk, Virginia, is the contracting activity (N62470-20-D-0002).U.S. TRANSPORTATION COMMANDUNCOMN LLC, Scott Air Force Base, Illinois (HTC711-20-D-D001), has been awarded an indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract, firm-fixed-price and labor-hour line items, with an estimated amount of $175,701,170.? The contract provides enterprise architecture, data and information technology engineering services for the U.S. Transportation Command, Air Mobility Command and the Surface Deployment and Distribution Center.? Work will be performed at Scott AFB, Illinois.? The contract's ordering period is Dec. 6, 2019, to Dec. 5, 2024.? Fiscal 2020 transportation working capital funds were obligated at award for the minimum guarantee.? Operations and maintenance; transportation working capital funds and research, development, test and evaluation funds may be obligated at task order execution.? U.S. Transportation Command, Directorate of Acquisition, Scott AFB, Illinois, is the contracting activity.ARMYRiptide Software,* Oviedo, Florida, was awarded a $43,000,000 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for target modernization and Targetry Range Automated Control and Recording system.? Bids were solicited via the internet with two received.? Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 2, 2027.? U.S. Army Contracting Command, Orlando, Florida, is the contracting activity (W900KK-20-D-0004).General Dynamics Land Systems, Sterling Heights, Michigan, was awarded a $12,456,918 cost-plus-fixed-fee foreign military sales (Kuwait) contract for contractor logistics services, maintenance training and technical assistance.? One bid was solicited via the internet with one bid received.? Work will be performed in Kuwait City, Kuwait, with an estimated completion date of Dec. 5, 2023.? Fiscal 2018 Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $12,456,918 were obligated at the time of the award.? U.S. Army Contracting Command, Warren, Michigan, is the contracting activity (W56HZV-20-C-0031).Smiths Detection, Edgewood, Maryland, was awarded an $11,734,549 modification (P00013) to contract W911SR-18-C-0033 for aerosol vapor chemical agent detector systems.? Work will be performed in Edgewood, Maryland, with an estimated completion date of May 29, 2020.? Fiscal 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $2,861,673 were obligated at the time of the award.? U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity.AIR FORCEL3 Technologies Inc., Communication Systems, West, Salt Lake City, Utah, has been awarded a $17,933,366 contract for the Defense Experimentation Using Commercial Space Internet (DEUCSI) Call 002 Vendor Flexibility effort.? This contract seeks to establish the ability to communicate with Air Force platforms via multiple commercial space internet constellations using common user terminal hardware elements.? Work will be performed at Salt Lake City, Utah, and is expected to be complete by Aug. 31, 2022.? This award is the result of a competitive acquisition under the DEUCSI Advanced Research Announcement Call 002.? Fiscal 2019 and 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $4,130,000 are being obligated at the time of award.? The Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8650-20-C-9313).BlueForce Inc., Hampton, Virginia, has been awarded a $15,683,635 firm-fixed-price, Option 1 modification (P00003) to previously-awarded contract FA3002-19-F-A045 for continued support for the Royal Saudi Air Force English language training outside the continental U.S. program.? Work will be performed at King Abdul Aziz Air Base, Saudi Arabia, and is expected to be completed by Jan. 3, 2024.? This contract involves 100% foreign military sales to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.? The total cumulative face value of the contract is $28,009,060.? Foreign Military Sales funds in the amount of $15,683,635 are being obligated at the time of award.? The 338th Specialized Contracting Squadron, Joint Base San Antonio, Randolph, Texas, is the contracting activity.Northrop Grumman Space & Mission Systems Corp., San Jose, California, has been awarded a $13,000,000 indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity for Airborne Signals Intelligence Payload (ASIP) efforts.? This contract provides for solutions for diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages, systems integration lab and cybersecurity support, upgrades to meet routine requirements identified via Air Force IMT 1067 modification proposals and engineering change proposals that are logical follow-ons to maintain and upgrade the ASIP sensor.? Work will be performed at Sacramento, California, and is expected to be completed by Dec. 31, 2020.? This award is the result of a sole source acquisition.? No funding is being obligated at the time of the award.? The Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8620-20-D-3025).BAE Systems Technology Solutions & Services Inc., Rockville, Maryland, has been awarded a $12,608,102 firm-fixed-price, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity contract modification (P00003) to previously-awarded contract FA8109-18-D-0005 to exercise Option Two.? The contract modification extends the contract term for an additional 12 months in order to continue providing diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages support for Air Force and non-Air Force users supporting the Air Force, to proactively reduce mission capability impacts to improve logistics support and weapon system sustainability.? This effort will help assure all required parts and materials supporting Air Force-managed weapon systems are available within acceptable production lead times and will reduce the overall cost of ownership of the weapon systems by facilitating economical diminishing manufacturing sources and material shortages resolutions costs, reducing the number of reactive solutions, minimizing any delays in organic depot-level repair, as well as contractor repair and by improving weapon system availability.? Work will be performed at Hill Air Force Base, Utah; Robins Air Force Base, Georgia; Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma; and Fort Walton Beach, Florida; and is expected to be completed by June 20, 2021.? The total cumulative face value of the contract is $37,386,305.? Fiscal 2020 and 2021 consolidated sustainment activity group engineering funds will be obligated on any individual task orders issued during the option two performance period.? The Air Force Sustainment Center, Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, is the contracting activity.Northrop Grumman Systems Corp., Herndon, Virginia, has been awarded a $9,947,673 contract for the Defense Experimentation Using Commercial Space Internet (DEUCSI) Call 002 Vendor Flexibility effort.? This contract seeks to establish the ability to communicate with Air Force platforms via multiple commercial space internet constellations using common user terminal hardware elements.? Work will be performed at San Diego, California, and is expected to be completed by November 2021.? This award is the result of a competitive acquisition under the DEUCSI Advanced Research Announcement Call 002.? Fiscal 2019 and 2020 research, development, test and evaluation funds in the amount of $3,633,549 are being obligated at the time of award.? The Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, is the contracting activity (FA8650-20-C-9315).*Small BusinessImpact Turn--Econ-Security Strat BadLinking economic and security goals harms the US in the long termDonald L. Losman, 12-8-2019, "Should Military Force Be Used For Ill-Defined Economic Goals?," National Interest, role of economics in America’s National Security Strategy (a document mandated by Congress upon the Executive branch in the 1980s) has undergone a remarkable, yet wholly unnoticed metamorphosis.? An examination is long overdue to unmask this evolution and question its validity, and particularly so with U.S. troops now maintaining oil fields in Syria. President Trump’s strategy document has four pillars. The first is a rather traditional ‘protecting the homeland,’ with border security being a new, added point. Pillar III, ‘advancing peace through strength,’ is hardly new. And Pillar IV, ‘advancing American influence,’ is similarly traditional. Pillar II, however, ‘promoting prosperity,’ is a purely economic goal, the likes of which has not been seen in years. Further, its subtitle, “Economic Security is National Security,” is a highly dubious claim. Clearly, supply availabilities have always been a concern to military planners. A strong economy, however, was traditionally deemed an enabling mechanism to finance a war rather than a war goal. The concept of a defense industrial base, another enabling mechanism (and one noted in the Trump strategy), became more prominent in the U.S. in the post-World War I period and demonstrably clear after World War II because it was America’s ‘arsenal of democracy’ which had propelled the Allies to victory. But it was the Arab oil embargo of October 1973 – deemed the cause of oil shortages, inflation, and recession – that launched the economic component toward morphing into a desired goal in itself. When oil prices spiked again after the 1979 Iranian revolution, Jimmy Carter subsequently announced that any attempt to control the Persian Gulf would be addressed by all means necessary.? In March 1980, the Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force, the precursor to the U.S. Central Command, was activated.??Linking economic security to military goals like arms sales creates resource conflict, military overstretch, and bad policyDonald L. Losman, 12-8-2019, "Should Military Force Be Used For Ill-Defined Economic Goals?," National Interest, , Trump’s strategy contains a very dubious assertion, namely, that “economic security is national security.” ??This is hardly the case.? First, what exactly does ‘economic security’ mean?? Alas, it is a loosely-defined expression ranging from FDR’s “a chicken in every pot” to affordable gas at every pump--whatever ‘affordable’ means. Economic security implies some minimal level of material welfare, while national security has historically meant defending domestic borders (Trump’s first pillar) and assisting allies. National security often implies clearly demarcated red lines, such as the launch of missiles from Cuba or Soviet troops crossing the Fulda Gap. There are no such red lines in the mushy economic security concept. Accordingly, despite the Trump NSS assertion, economic security differs from national security, as regularly demonstrated by perennial fiscal fights over whether the military should be better funded for its national security mandate or should social welfare programs enhancing economic security get priority. Additionally, while prosperity makes war-financing easier, neither the Russian nor Chinese peoples have significant ‘economic security’ (however defined), but they do have very formidable militaries. Indeed, President Trump himself correctly views an impoverished North Korea as a threat. Conversely, a rather wealthy, economically secure Kuwait was quickly victimized by a poorer, but well-armed Iraq. Very importantly, adding economic goals to military planning complicates that effort and dilutes defense resources from core missions. The U.S. military will be very, very busy when price hikes and supply disruptions – of oil, semiconductors, rare earths, or other ‘critical’ resources – occur, as they inevitably will. Further, as Berger and Eaglen have recently noted, the current U.S. strategy contains a serious mismatch between taskings and funding. America’s military, already over-stretched, will become ever more so if achieving economic goals is added to its ‘to-do’ list. Similarly, and perhaps of greater importance, the addition of economic goals shifts the moral foundations of national security onto very shaky grounds. Should military force really be used to attain an ill-defined economic security? Should blood be spilled to promote prosperity? There are alternative, non-violent means, like monetary and fiscal policies, strategic reserves, appropriate domestic pricing, and improved trade arrangements. When Japan attacked its Pacific neighbors to form a 'co-prosperity sphere,' and Nazi Germany justified aggression in the name of ‘living space’ (Lebensraum), the world was appalled.? Accordingly, in addition to over-tasking America’s military, the elevation of economics from a supporting role to that of a war aim is morally very questionable.?DIB—NegativeUS Arms Sales UpAmerican Arms Sales up, they are the top 5 suppliers for the first time in 16 yearsNiall Mccarthy, 12-9-2019, "The World’s Largest Arms-Producing Companies In 2018 [Infographic]," Forbes, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) has released its latest overview of the world's largest arms-producing and military services companies, finding that their sales increased 4.6% last year. In total, global weapons industry sales reached $420 billion, a figure that's 47% higher than in 2002. The study excluded Chinese arms manufacturers due to a lack of data to make a reliable estimate. It found that as in previous years, American companies dominated the top-100 list, with sales by all U.S. companies amounting to $246 billion - 59% of total global arms sales. The five biggest U.S. companies - Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics - raked in $148 billion and accounted for 35% of total sales, a 7.2% increase on 2017. 2018 was the first year since 2002 that the top-five spots in the ranking were exclusively held by U.S. companies. Lockheed Martin was in first place with its sales totalling $47.26 billion while Boeing and Raytheon had the second and third-highest figures on the list with $29.15 billion and $26.19 billion respectively. Non-U.S. companies making the top-10 included BAE Systems with $21.21 billion, Airbus with $11.65 billion, Leonardo with $9.82 billion, Almaz-Antey with $9.64 billion and Thales with $9.47 billion.US Arms sales rose 5% last year, must stay competitive with Russia and China to see continued gainsTaipei Times, 12-10-2019, "Arms sales worldwide up nearly 5 percent: report," Taipei Times, sales rose by nearly 5 percent worldwide last year in a market dominated by the US, according to a new report published yesterday by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The turnover of the 100 biggest arms manufacturers came to US$420 billion, thanks in large part to the US market, the report said. US manufacturers alone accounted for 59 percent of the market, or a turnover of US$246 billion, up 7.2 percent on the previous year. “This is a significant increase over one year considering the already high levels of US combined arms sales,” Aude Fleurant, the director of SIPRI’s arms transfers and military expenditure program, told reporters. US firms were benefiting from US President Donald Trump’s administration’s decision to modernize its armed services to reinforce its position against China and Russia. Russia was second in the rankings for arms production, with 8.6 percent of the market, just ahead of the UK on 8.4 percent and France on 5.5 percent.Reform the DIB CP SolvencyReform the DIB UQ-CP SolvencyAaron Mehta and Joe Gould, 12-5-2019, "Here are five ambitious steps to grow the defense innovation base and challenge China," Defense News, bipartisan task force is?led by co-chairs?Jim Talent, a former Republican U.S. senator, and Bob Work, who last served as deputy secretary of defense. It includes four sitting members of Congress — Republicans Jim Banks of Indiana and Mike Gallagher of Wisconsin, as well as Democrats Andy Kim of New Jersey and Stephanie Murphy of Florida — the CEO of Textron Systems, and a group of former U.S. officials. Speaking to reporters Thursday, Reagan Institute head Roger Zakheim said his organization will spend the next year trying to “move the ball” on as many of the key recommendations as possible.“Our government is not organized around the national industrial base. The government is not organized around it so it can’t do the things the government is responsible to do, which is enable, develop, guide and safeguard,” Zakheim said. “So it’s pretty critical, whether they adopt our recommendations or another framework, the government needs to be organized around the innovation base.”To do that, the task force lays out five key recommendations:1.The creation of a new interagency body, tentatively called the “National Security Innovation Committee,” that would be tasked with closely monitoring and guiding the health of the industrial base. The task force also spells out that this committee should “be responsible for coordinating and submitting a unified budget analysis to Congress each year to evaluate all of the activities” in the U.S. government that relates to the NSIB. Doing so would maintain a rolling look at how the government is doing on coordination. The Pentagon would be the lead agency in this committee.2.Creating a national “STEM Corps,” which would provide free university tuition in national-security-relevant fields in exchange for a commitment to spend several years working within the national security industrial base in some capacity. It would be modeled on ROTC or the National Guard, with both an active and reserve component. The “active” component of the STEM Corps would include graduates through the program who would work full-time in designated government and DoD billets. The “reserve” component would work two days each month, and 14 days each summer, with government agencies or Pentagon offices.3.A National Security Innovation Base Visa, which would encourage highly vetted, highly skilled workers from abroad to contribute to national security projects. This issue is one that has been?identified by experts?as a major issue for America’s defense innovation?going forward; the U.S. has long relied on STEM expertise from allies and partners, and tech companies coveted by defense leaders soften have international staffs. Zakheim acknowledged this might be the toughest step to take, noting that “You can put the words ‘national security innovation’ and everyone will be for it, then you add the word ‘visa’ and people withdraw.” But he said not helping individuals from allied nations to stay and work on key U.S. problems just leads to “brain drain” that hurts American national interests. Given the need for Congress to create such a visa program, Zakheim noted that there are four members of Congress from the task force who represent a beachhead on the hill for the concept.4.That visa program would go hand in hand with setting up a more formal international framework for national security industrial efforts, in order to?utilize capabilities being produced by close allies. Zakheim thinks this opportunity could be set up “fairly quickly,” in part due to work in previous national defense authorization bills that expanded the definition of the National Technology and Industrial Base to include Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia. “It’s just about getting the senior officials to engage on that with their counterparts, because I think there would be a lot of willingness and interest on the part of allies and friends” to expand industrial cooperation, Zakheim said.5.And of course it would not be a defense report in 2019 without recommendations for a broad array of Pentagon business reforms, with the target of creating a more “risk-positive” development mindset in the NSIB. The department is already undergoing a series of reform efforts, and acquisition head Ellen Lord has talked repeatedly about trying to retrain the work force to no longer fear innovative failures.Impeachment UpdatesImpeachment—Not Gonna HappenTrump will not be removed by the senate, it is now a question of 2020Brad Bannon, 12-9-2019, "Senate acquittal would be nothing but a stay of execution for Trump," TheHill, week House Speaker?Nancy Pelosi?called for articles of impeachment against President Trump. “The president abused his power for his own personal political benefit at the expense of our national security,” Pelosi said. Trump’s removal from office is really a three-step process. The House of Representatives will impeach or indict the president, the Senate will try him and voters, acting as the court of last resort, will hear Trump’s case on appeal and decide whether or not he will remain in the White House. For easy reference, think of the process as an episode of “Law and Order.” Let’s call this show “Law and Order: Quid Pro Quo.” Donald Trump is the defendant and Nancy Pelosi is the district attorney. The assistant district attorney who will be the lead prosecutor is the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Adam Schiff. The members of the House of Representatives are the grand jurors who will decide whether to indict the president for abuse of power and bribery. The trial will take place in the Senate, where Chief Justice John Roberts will preside. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is the foreman of the jury, which is made up of the 100 members of the Senate. Act III in this drama will have a cast of millions. The appellate court judges are the American voters. This is the court of public opinion, which will ultimately decide whether Trump continues to serve as president after January 20, 2021. Before Christmas, the House will indict Trump on one or more of the articles of impeachment and then the Senate will acquit him. The real fun starts in 2020, when the legal proceedings in Washington are over and Democrats make their case against the president’s abuse of power to the entire nation. Impeachment has been a foregone conclusion since the unidentified whistleblower complained about the president’s September 24 quid pro quo phone call with the president of Ukraine. Trump’s willingness to stop American arms sales to the country that is the object of Vladimir Putin’s imperial designs was a sure sign that he cared more about his own political hide than he did about American or Ukrainian national security. Once the call become public, Democratic opposition in the House to impeachment cooled and Trump’s fate in the lower chamber was frozen. Sadly, Senate acquittal is also a done deal. Republican House members on the Intelligence and Judiciary committees have made it quite clear during the impeachment inquiry that the GOP is in the tank for the president. The obstinacy of House Republicans makes it crystal clear that House Democrats can’t secure the 20 Senate Republican votes needed to remove the president from office. If the Senate fails to remove the president, Trump will use the acquittal as vindication. But Senate acquittal may be nothing more than a stay of execution for Trump. The evidence and public testimony may not have convinced House and Senate Republicans, but it has moved the public, which has the final say on Trump’s tenure.The public will make the final decision on Trump in 2020Brad Bannon, 12-9-2019, "Senate acquittal would be nothing but a stay of execution for Trump," TheHill, deserves a lot of credit for her handling of the impeachment process. A CNN national survey conducted in May indicated that a clear majority opposed impeaching and removing the president (41 percent yes, 51 percent no). But the impeachment inquiry turned the public around. A follow up survey by the network in late November showed that most people (50 percent yes, 43 percent no) had decided it was time for the president to go. In the November poll, a majority of Americans (56 percent) rejected the president’s defense that his only concern was corruption in the Eastern European country. Six in ten Americans (62 percent) don’t think Trump is honest and trustworthy. Trump will claim the Senate acquittal absolves him of guilt. But the impeachment process will pay off for Democrats in 2020. House Democrats have presented a compelling case to voters about the president’s guilt. Pelosi has already convinced Americans that Trump has abused his power as president by trying to trade arms for campaign favors. She has cleared the way for the Democratic presidential nominee to make the case that Trump has abused his power in other areas. The Democratic advocate will argue that the president abused his power when he deprived millions of Americans of affordable health insurance and threw thousands of people, including women and children, into detainment facilities on the Mexican border. People died because they couldn’t afford health insurance and people died in those camps, including a 16-year-old boy, Carlos Hernandez Vasquez. The next Democratic president will use his or her power to work with Congress to extend health care coverage to the millions of Americans who desperately need it and to enact a rational immigration policy that provides a path to citizenship and ramps up border security. The Senate may not convict Trump, but he faces big trouble in the court of public opinion. American voters will render their own verdict in November, and the fruits of the House impeachment inquiry will provide the evidence that moves voters to remove Trump from office themselves.The Impeachment Vote will be party line, and the Senate won’t vote to remove TrumpNicholas Fandos, 12-10-2019, "House Democrats Unveil Articles of Impeachment Against Trump," No Publication, all but a handful of House Republicans firmly united behind Mr. Trump, the charges Democrats have settled on are all but certain to face monolithic Republican opposition. If that does not change, and Mr. Trump continues a defiant defense, the impeachment vote against him could take place strictly along party lines, save for one independent, Representative Justin Amash of Michigan, who has signaled he will join Democrats. The impeachment effort would also face an uphill battle in the Republican-controlled Senate, where it would take the support of two-thirds of the chamber to convict Mr. Trump and remove him from office — a highly unlikely scenario, particularly in an election year. A little more than an hour before Democrats’ announcement, Mr. Trump declared on Twitter that it was “sheer Political Madness” to impeach a president who has done “NOTHING wrong” and overseen “perhaps the strongest economy in our country’s history.” And after it concluded, he wrote on the platform that the Democrats’ charge that he sought Ukraine’s election interference was “ridiculous” and pointed to a statement from Ukraine’s leader that he did not feel pressured to investigate the Bidens.NDAA Internal LinksInternal Link—Space ForceNDAA Creates Space ForceBrian W. Everstine, 12-8-2019, "Agreement Reached on NDAA," Air Force Magazine, VALLEY, Calif. — Senate and House conferees have reached an agreement on the fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act, with a vote expected on Dec. 9, key lawmakers said. Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.) outlined the schedule Dec. 7 at the Reagan National Defense Forum here, but stopped short of detailing the plan for creating an independent Space Force, although the structure of the new service has been “agreed upon for a couple months.” Conferees will sign the bill on the afternoon of Dec. 9, and it will be filed later that day. The House is expected to hold a floor vote on Dec. 11, Rogers said. Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas) said earlier on Dec. 7, “We have reached agreement” on the bill, but he declined to offer details. Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.) said the final product will show that many different constituencies were able to come together for a bill that is “good for the country.” “We got it done, we got a good bill,” he said. The bill, when announced, will outline the lawmakers’ concern that in creating a new Space Force there should not be a new, huge bureaucracy. Instead, the Pentagon must maximize efficiency while “minimizing the amount of money spent,” Smith said. The conferees worked in a bipartisan way to “keep it under control” and not give the Pentagon a “blank check,” he said. Defense Secretary Mark Esper, speaking at the same forum, thanked lawmakers for agreeing on the bill, adding that it is essential the NDAA fully authorize the creation of the Space Force. The conference had struggled to find agreement on the bill, with split opinions on issues such as the Space Force, using military funds to build a wall on the southern border, among other issues.NDAA Creates a Space ForceTheresa Hitchens, 12-7-2019, "Congress Agrees Space Force; 2020 NDAA Vote Next Week," Breaking Defense, NATIONAL DEFENSE FORUM: Secretary of Defense Mark Esper thanked Congress today for approving the Space Force in the fiscal 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), with the bill expected to come to a vote next week. “It was essential that this year’s NDAA fully authorize the creation of a Space Force as the sixth branch of the armed forces,” Esper told the annual Reagan National Defense Forum. “And I want to personally thank Congress for doing that.” The House, Senate and the White House have struck a deal that will establish a Space Force, Rep. Mike Rogers told a panel here today. Under the deal, the Democrats in Congress okayed the force as a sixth branch of the military in exchange for acquiescence by the Republicans to providing 12 weeks of paid maternity leave for federal workers. Rogers, one of the original authors of the House’s effort two years ago to create a new military structure for space, said that the Congress “will be signing out” the final NDAA text on Monday with voting to follow. According to insiders, the House vote is slated for this coming Wednesday.Space Force LogisticsTheresa Hitchens, 12-7-2019, "Congress Agrees Space Force; 2020 NDAA Vote Next Week," Breaking Defense, organizational shape of the Space Force will be somewhere between the House and Senate versions of the NDAA, but more along the lines of the House, sources close to the Hill told?Breaking D. That is, it will be underneath the Air Force, in a manner similar to that of the Marine Corps’s relationship to the Navy. And at least for the near-term, only?Air Force personnel would be involved?— as opposed to the Pentagon’s plan to begin right away to move Army and Navy personnel as well over to the new force.“It is important the the Air Force get on the case for space,” Barbara Barrett, in one of her first public appearances since her appointment, told the forum. She said that work has been ongoing for sometime by a “war room” of senior officials to scope the initial force structure and costs. She declined to give details though, saying that the service needs to wait for the final NDAA language to be sure what is being asked of it.Maj. Gen. Clinton E. Crosier, who is in charge of the Air Force planning process for the Space Force, told?Breaking D?yesterday during the West Coast Aerospace Forum in Santa Monica that while they haven’t been able to talk much about it, the service already has put together detailed alternate plans — based on possible outcomes from the NDAA — for how to stand up the Space Force “from day one.”“Our primary planing directive has been: execute all necessary planning to preserve the opportunity to rapidly stand up if authorized. So we are doing a wide scope of planning trying to get more and more narrow as we get more clarity,” he said. “But we’re going to be ready to respond to whatever the language says.”Barrett said the Space Force will need to focus on both how to protect current national security space assets and ensure that the overall architecture fulfills the future needs of the warfighters on the ground.Internal Link—Paid Family LeaveThe NDAA includes 12 weeks of paid paternal leave for federal employeesLia Russell, 12-9-2019, "Paid parental leave for feds in NDAA," FCW, must-pass 2020 National Defense Authorization Act is set to emerge from conference committee with a provision that includes 12 weeks of paid parental leave for civilian federal employees to care for a new child. The benefit -- long sought by advocates for federal workers -- puts civilian feds on par with the uniformed military who get the same benefit. For years, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.), the new chairwoman of the House Committee on Oversight and Reform, has campaigned for expanded parental and family leave benefits. She's the lead sponsor of Federal Employee Paid Leave Act -- the measure that provided some of the legislative language for provision in the NDAA. At a Sept. 25 hearing, Maloney contended that paid leave is often a deciding factor when workers are offered employment in either the public or private sector and it's lack hurts retention and recruitment among federal workers. "For a country that talks about family values, when you look at the policies we have in place we are really far behind the rest of the world," she said at the hearing. Most civilian federal workers must use accrued sick or unpaid leave time to care for a new child. Many feds rely on donated leave from colleagues. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation recently extended six-weeks of parental leave to employees as part of a recent union contract, but that's the exception and not the rule for civilian feds.Internal Link—Turkey SanctionsThe NDAA Includes Sanctions on Turkey Reuters, 12-9-2019, "U.S. Lawmakers Reach Deal on Massive Defense Bill, Eye Russia, Turkey, China," No Publication, NDAA also prohibits the transfer of F-35 stealth fighter jets, which Lockheed Martin Corp is developing, to Turkey. It expresses a Sense of Congress that Turkey's acquisition of Russia's S-400 missile defense system, which Washington says it not compatible with NATO defenses and threatens the F-35, constitutes a significant transaction under U.S. sanctions law. The bill says Trump should implement sanctions on Turkey over the S-400 purchase, something lawmakers have been demanding.Internal Link—Increased Ukraine SalesThe NDAA Increases Arms Sales to UkraineReuters, 12-9-2019, "U.S. Lawmakers Reach Deal on Massive Defense Bill, Eye Russia, Turkey, China," No Publication, NDAA also reauthorizes $300 million of funding for the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative, to include lethal defensive items as well as new authorities for coastal defense cruise missiles and anti-ship missiles. Military aid to Ukraine has been at the center of the impeachment inquiry into Trump, after his administration held up security assistance for Kiev last summer even as the country dealt with challenges from Russia.Internal Link—North Korea SanctionsThe NDAA Increases North Korean Nuclear SanctionsReuters, 12-9-2019, "U.S. Lawmakers Reach Deal on Massive Defense Bill, Eye Russia, Turkey, China," No Publication, NDAA calls for a sweeping approach to North Korea's nuclear weapons development, as well as the threat it poses to U.S. forces on the Korean peninsula and allies in the region. It puts mandatory sanctions on North Korean imports and exports of coal and other minerals and textiles, as well as some petroleum products and crude oil, and it puts additional sanctions on banks that deal with North Korea. The bill also bars the Pentagon from reducing the number of troops deployed to South Korea below 28,500 unless the Secretary of Defense certifies that it is in the U.S. national security interest to do so.Internal Link—SoKo DrawdownThe NDAA blocks drawing down troops from South KoreaJacob Fromer, 12-10-2019, "U.S. Congress moves to block Trump from pulling troops out of South Korea," NK News - North Korea News, United States Congress has moved to block President Donald Trump from pulling U.S. troops out of the Korean peninsula, according to the latest version of the country’s annual defense bill made public late Monday night in Washington. The bill, known as the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — a massive legal document that determines U.S. military policy and maximum spending levels for the year ahead — includes a requirement that would effectively ban the president from reducing the number of troops in South Korea below 28,500, essentially their current number. Last year’s NDAA put that lower limit at 22,000.The NDAA blocks drawing down troops from South KoreaJacob Fromer, 12-10-2019, "U.S. Congress moves to block Trump from pulling troops out of South Korea," NK News - North Korea News, removing American troops from South Korea is in the national security interest of the U.S. and “will not significantly undermine the security of United States allies in the region,” and if the Secretary of Defense has “appropriately consulted with allies of the United States, including South Korea and Japan, regarding such a reduction,” according to the text of the bill. If those conditions are met, the Secretary of Defense would then have to notify Congress, and after 90 days, the U.S. troop presence would then be allowed to decrease. Otherwise, it will be illegal. An earlier version of the NDAA by the Senate’s version, before it had to compromise with the House, included one additional requirement for the withdrawal of U.S. troops: it would only be allowed if North Korea’s conventional military threat was reducing too. The original House version of the NDAA did not include that line, however, and it is unclear why it did not appear in the final compromise version of the bill.Internal Link—Hypersonic Technology The NDAA includes provisions for hypersonic research which is key to Competing with ChinaWIBW, 12-10-2019, "Rep. Banks Celebrates Commitment to Hypersonics Research in NDAA Conference Report – WBIW," No Publication, (WASHINGTON) – The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) Conference Report was filed with the Rules Committee tonight. Rep. Banks submitted and fought for language to be included in the report that directs the Department of Defense (DOD) to establish a Joint Hypersonics Transition Office (JHTO) with a university consortium. As a conferee of the conference committee, Rep. Banks signed the Conference Report before it was filed. The report received bipartisan and bicameral support. “Hypersonics is crucial to our global competition with China. I am proud of Indiana’s contributions to this important research and their close partnerships with the Department of Defense,” said Rep. Jim Banks. “This is one of many wins for Hoosiers in the NDAA. I look forward to sharing these wins when the package comes to the floor for a final vote.” The Joint Hypersonics Transition Office language in the NDAA strengthens the partnership between the DOD and universities by creating a hypersonics consortium. The JHTO will ensure that hypersonics research and development efforts throughout the Department of Defense are well-coordinated and will also strengthen connections between the DOD with ongoing research efforts in academia. The language establishes a runway for Indiana universities like Purdue and Notre Dame to apply their decades of hypersonics expertise to ongoing projects within the Department of Defense. Hypersonics is a crucial technology to compete with global adversaries like China, who have invested heavily in similar technologies. This year’s NDAA is historic, supporting $738 billion for our national defense.?Internal Link—Election SecurityThe NDAA includes several provisions to secure the 2020 electionsAndrew Eversden, 12-10-2019, "Several election security provisions are in the massive defense bill," Fifth Domain, National Defense Authorization Act released Dec. 9 contains several provisions aimed at securing U.S. election infrastructure months before presidential primary season is in full-swing. The provisions in the compromised conference report mandate a broad range of election-related steps, from an assessment of foreign intelligence threats to U.S. elections to allowing top state election officials to receive Top Secret security clearances. The security clearance language is good news for the information-sharing relationship between the the federal government and state election officials, who don’t have proper clearance to view high-level intelligence related to election infrastructure cyberthreats. Throughout the 2016 election, the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI had a fraught information-sharing relationship with the states. In the years since, top federal election officials have consistently said information sharing needed to be improved, and while officials say it has been, the clearance problem was still a hindrance. The election security language in the bill directs DHS to furnish a report on 2016 cyberattacks on U.S. election infrastructure by foreign government within 60 days of the bill being signed into law. The report, which Congress wants unclassified, must include attempted and successful cyberattacks related to the 2016 election, including the names of the states and localities affected. Congress also wants it to include all attacks on vote registration databases, voting machines, voting-related computer networks. The Senate Intelligence Committee released a report on cyberattacks on election infrastructure in 2016, but it was heavily redacted and only identified states by a number. If signed into the law, the NDAA also mandates that the intelligence community produce a report on security vulnerabilities in state election systems no later than 180 days before a federal election and submit it to congressional leadership and committees. The new authorization bill also asks the intelligence community, FBI, DHS, DoD, and the Departments of State and Treasury to produce a “whole-of-government” strategy to defend against Russian cyberoperations against U.S. election infrastructure. The intelligence community definitively concluded that it was the Russian government behind the cyberattacks and interference in the 2016 election. Congress wants the strategy provided by the potpourri of government agencies to include potential “deterrence” actions that “could or should” be undertaken to deter Russia and other nations from interfering with election systems. This section is perhaps the most intriguing, given that experts consider deterrence in cyberspace extremely difficult.Internal Link—Laundry ListTurkey Sanctions and NoKo PressureReuters, 12-9-2019, "U.S. Lawmakers Reach Deal on Massive Defense Bill, Eye Russia, Turkey, China," No Publication, — U.S. lawmakers announced an agreement on Monday on a $738-billion bill setting policy for the Department of Defense, including new measures for competing with Russia and China, family leave for federal workers and the creation of President Donald Trump's long-desired Space Force. It also calls for sanctions on Turkey over its purchase of a Russian missile defense system, and a tough response to North Korea's efforts to develop nuclear weapons. The U.S. House of Representatives and Senate Armed Services Committees agreed on a compromise version of the National Defense Authorization Act, or NDAA, after months of negotiations. It is expected to pass before Congress leaves Washington later this month for the year-end holiday break.NDAA Positives---InternalsJohn M. Donnelly, 12-10-2019, "Democrats ‘got completely rolled’ in NDAA talks, critics say," Roll Call, president and his fellow Republicans carried the day not just in what they kept out of the bill but also in what they put into it. One GOP victory was the authorization for the highest defense budget since World War II, adjusted for inflation, save for when the Iraq and Afghanistan wars were at their peak. That outcome was secured in August when the two parties agreed to raise spending on military and non-military spending by equal amounts above the caps then in law. Trump and his allies also obtained creation of a so-called Space Force inside the Air Force, though many Democrats back the idea as well, if not all the details on implementing it. Despite the Democrats’ many defeats, they at least won a few prizes of note in the new NDAA. These include the proposal to provide federal workers with 12 weeks of paid leave to care for a newborn. Republicans normally resist extensions of benefits for federal workers, and the Trump administration has been no exception. But this change got a boost from within the first family, as Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter and adviser, championed the move. Democrats also won a victory when conferees decided to overturn the “widow’s tax.” That is the longstanding statutory requirement that survivors of deceased U.S. military personnel — some 65,000 people whose spouses either were killed in action or who died of service-related causes in retirement — must see their Defense Department death benefits reduced by however much they are receiving from a similar account in the Department of Veterans Affairs. Another Democratic triumph came when the conferees established an administrative process for military personnel to be compensated for medical malpractice in military facilities, though conferees stopped short of allowing plaintiffs to sue the Pentagon over such claims.Internal Link--CR Bad for DefenseIf we fail to pass an actual defense budget or NDAA and settle for another continuing resolution it will destroy military readiness.Wesley Hallman, 12-3-2019, " Another CR, Another Blow to National Security," National Defense, ’s so bad about an extended, or worse, a year-long continuing resolution? While some see saved dollars due to spending at prior-year levels or merely delays that accelerated contracting and financing later in the year can mitigate, the insidious effects of a long-term CR mean fewer warriors with lower readiness, slowed fielding of capabilities, and a defense industrial base yet again burdened by delays and uncertainties. Despite a two-year budget deal signed early this past summer establishing defense toplines for fiscal years 2020 and 2021, we have no National Defense Authorization Act or a signed defense appropriations bill. Funding uncertainty followed by a year-long CR could mean $22 billion in lost purchasing power the Defense Department gained under the two-year budget agreement. That’s purchasing power needed to continue the readiness recovery along with funding critical investments, especially by the Army, to realign resourcing to the 2018 National Defense Strategy. The continuing resolution that was in place at the beginning of this fiscal year blocked 79 new program starts and 39 planned program increases. When starting the new fiscal year with a continuing resolution became apparent, the department asked for “anomalies” to execute these actions, but Congress provided none. And, even if there is a year-long CR with some anomalies allowed, history shows the Defense Department gets that for only about 20 percent of those actions. Doing business with the federal government is already hard. The tomes of regulations, the burdensome business requirements, the sometimes Kafkaesque contracting and oversight procedures, and compressed margins make this a sector that has seen a net outflow of companies. Add to that the uncertainty of if and when a full-year defense appropriations measure and NDAA get signed into law, more companies will reassess their participation in the defense industrial base. The government disincentivizes new, innovative entrants into the defense sector even though the policy of the Defense Department places a priority on doing the exact opposite in order to bring in new ideas, new capabilities and greater competition. Fiscal year 2018 marked the ninth year in a row to begin with a CR. The Navy alone reported over $10 billion lost in inefficient acquisitions over that time period. Additionally, the Center for Strategic and International Studies noted over 11,000 companies had left the defense industrial base during that period. But, with a budget deal and a recognition that CRs are no way to maintain national security, Congress passed and the president signed the fiscal year 2019 defense funding bill and NDAA before the beginning of the fiscal year, allowing real progress across department priorities and investments by industry. Unfortunately, the learned lesson was short-lived, and we find ourselves again beginning the fiscal year with a CR, no NDAA, and talk of that extending through the whole of the fiscal year with all the concomitant harm and inefficiencies that come with it. Most of the inefficiencies and many of the exits from the industrial base result from delayed or canceled contracting starts. Many will understand that a delayed start can lead to aggravation for larger contractors, but that aggravation becomes existential for smaller prime contractors and companies down the supply chain. The effect of that has a human face and a long-term impact.A continuing resolution will destroy military readiness, crushing national securityWesley Hallman, 12-3-2019, " Another CR, Another Blow to National Security," National Defense, is no wonder why so many companies left the defense industrial base during the last long run of CRs. Over time, though, it means our national security is at risk. According to Rep. Steve Womack, R-Ark.,“When Congress fails to provide stable funding, we hinder our warfighters and neglect our constitutional duty of providing for the common defense. We can’t continue to hold our military hostage — and anything less than sustained, predictable appropriations will damage national security.” This is especially true in an era of great power competition. Our National Defense Strategy calls out two specific competitor nations: China and Russia. Neither of these countries have ever worried about a CR. Instead, our delays enable them to take advantage of time, time we will never get back, and time they will use to continue to chip away at the advantages America has invested in, trained for, and brought to bear in the defense of the nation and its interests. In today’s national security environment, we cannot afford a long-term CR. We cannot afford to hamper readiness recovery efforts, delay capabilities to warfighters, postpone investments in advanced technologies, or allow the defense industrial base to erode.Russia Fill-In—Both WaysNeg UpdatesRussia saw arms sales growth in 2018-19Taipei Times, 12-10-2019, "Arms sales worldwide up nearly 5 percent: report," Taipei Times, top-ranked Russian firm, Almaz-Antei, jumped to ninth on the list with turnover of US$9.6 billion — increasing 18 percent from the previous year. “This increase was based not only on strong domestic demand, but also on continuing growth in arms sales to other countries, in particular exports of the S-400 air defense system,” the report said. One of the buyers of this system is NATO member Turkey, which took the deal, despite a US threat of sanctions. Turkey’s arms industry had two businesses in the top 100 and turnover of US$2.8 billion, up 22 percent on the previous year. Turkey was “driven by the goal of being self-sufficient in arms supply and therefore develop arms production capabilities in all segments (land systems, air systems, naval systems, missiles, etc.),” Fleurant said. “Turkey is also involved with an enduring armed conflict with the Kurds, which also tends to increase demand for arms,” she added.Russia and US Arms Growth NowJack Guy, Cnn, 12-9-2019, "Global weapons sales up as US manufacturers dominate world market," CNN, (CNN)The?global arms?industry continues to grow with total sales up 4.6% last year, according to data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released Monday. The top 100 weapons companies sold $420 billion in arms and military services in 2018, and the top five companies are all from the United States, said SIPRI in a statement. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon and General Dynamics made $148 billion in sales, equivalent to 35% of the total. Overall, US companies account for 59% of total sales. Global arms sales by companies listed in SIPRI's top 100 have grown by 47% since 2002, when the SIPRI database was started. It does not include Chinese arms companies due to a lack of reliable data. Sales by Russian companies remained stable year-on-year, with $36.2 billion total sales or 8.6% of the global total. The country's largest arms producer -- Almaz-Antey -- recorded growth of 18%.Aff--Impact TakeoutIt takes 5-7 years to access new arms marketsJoe Bavier, 11-22-2019, "South Africa blocks arms sales to Saudi and UAE in inspection row," U.S., companies have already indicated that they will need to cut more than 500 employees if they can’t export their products soon, trade union Solidarity said. On July 3, Solidarity and other unions wrote to Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan stating that failure to resolve the impasse would lead to “job losses on a massive and irreversible scale”. “Customers in the UAE have already begun firing trials with China, India as well as Serbia with the intention to replace RDM as a preferred supplier of ammunition,” said the letter seen by Reuters. Three weeks later, Norbert Schulze, RDM’s CEO at the time, wrote to the NCACC urging it to take action. In his Aug. 5 response, also seen by Reuters, NCACC chairman Jackson Mthembu said the body would not grant an exception. “The NCACC is aware of the possible loss of jobs occasioned by the inability to export in the time being. However, as your organization would appreciate, compliance with regulations sometimes produces negative impact,” he wrote. The government is encouraging defense companies to avoid an over-reliance on the Gulf, the NCACC official told Reuters. But building up business in new markets would take time. “It’s not like selling Coca-Cola. It can take 5-7 years to go into new markets,” one defense company official said. “I don’t think the politicians are aware how serious this is.”Saudi Affirmative UpdatesAT—Houthis are ProxysState department no longer classifies Houthis as Iranian ProxiesBryant Harris, 12-6-2019, "Intel: How US just contradicted its own justification for arming the Saudis in Yemen," Al-Monitor, key State Department official portrayed the Houthi rebels as independent from Tehran in a briefing with reporters on Thursday, a significant shift that flies in the face of years of US justification for its role in the war in Yemen. “The Houthis’ de-escalation proposal, which the Saudis are responding to, shows that Iran clearly does not speak for the Houthis, nor have the best interests of the Yemeni people at heart,” the department’s Iran coordinator Brian Hook told reporters at the State Department. “Iran is trying to prolong Yemen’s civil war to project power.” Why it matters: Since 2015, both the Barack Obama and the Donald Trump administrations — as well as a bipartisan coalition of Iran hawks in Congress — have used Tehran’s support for the Houthis to justify continued support for the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen despite the civilian death toll. The coalition’s defenders have sought to paint the Houthis as direct agents of Iran, rather than autonomous actors.State department no longer classifies Houthis as Iranian ProxiesBryant Harris, 12-6-2019, "Intel: How US just contradicted its own justification for arming the Saudis in Yemen," Al-Monitor, messages: Former US diplomats insist that the Houthis’ independence from Iran was always well known. “Look, we have said all along that the Houthis are pursuing Houthi objectives,” Gerald Feierstein, who served as ambassador to Yemen from 2010 to 2013, told Al-Monitor this week. “And the fact that they cooperate with the Iranians, and the Iranians help the Houthis because the Iranians see advantage in using the Houthis to pressure Saudi Arabia, all of that is true. But the Houthis have never been proxies of Iran. They never followed Iranian leadership guidance.” What’s next: Hook’s new emphasis on the supposed strategic rift between Iran and the Houthis indicates that the Trump administration is likely to do more to push the Saudi-led coalition and the Yemeni government to resolve the bloody war through peace negotiations than it previously has. It could also lend further ammunition to the ever-growing efforts on Capitol Hill to block Saudi arms sales – legislation that Trump has repeatedly vetoed.The Florida Shooter (Training Missions)--LinksThe Saudi Government uses FMS to train military personnel like the florida shooterMiriam Berger, 12-7-2019, "Saudis have come for U.S. military training for decades. Here’s why and how.," Washington Post, ’s assailant, Ahmed Mohammed al-Shamrani, was at Naval Air Station Pensacola on one of more than 5,500 temporary visas issued to Saudi military personnel by the State Department in 2019, according to department data. As of Friday, there were 852 Saudis in the United States for Pentagon-sponsored training related to security cooperation. That represents 16 percent of the 5,181 students from 153 countries in these programs, according to Defense Department spokesman Chris Garver. Pensacola is just one of more than 150 military schools and installations where these students study annually. Overall, between 2009 and 2018, the State Department issued more than 980,000 temporary, nonimmigrant visas to Saudi nationals, the highest rate for any country in the Middle East after Israel. Most of those visas were for students and tourists, although some also went to military personnel. Saudi Arabia is a major recipient of U.S. military aid and assistance, a core component of Washington and Riyadh’s decades-long geopolitical and economic ties that has partly shaped the course of the Middle East. In recent years, Saudi Arabia has largely funded its students on these programs through foreign military sales and other contracts, according to the Congressional Research Service.Here is what FMS trainees learn in the USMiriam Berger, 12-7-2019, "Saudis have come for U.S. military training for decades. Here’s why and how.," Washington Post, do they study? Shamrani was in Pensacola through a U.S. Air Force Foreign Military Sales training course funded by Saudi Arabia. He started in 2017 and was on course to conclude in August 2020. The program included training in English, basic aviation and piloting. Military students from Kenya, Nigeria, Togo, India, Oman, Tunisia, Fiji, Haiti, Indonesia, Malaysia, Mauritius and the Philippines have also studied at Pensacola, according to the State Department. Saudi Arabia is one of the world’s largest purchaser of arms, and many of these weapons are manufactured in the United States. At Naval Air Station Pensacola, foreign military personnel can receive training on aircraft such as the F-15 fighter and the C-130 cargo plane, which are among the items Saudi Arabia has purchased. Other coursework offered for Saudis through these programs have included leadership training for senior naval officers, The Washington Post’s?Dan Lamothe reported.USMCA—Both WaysIt’s DeadIt’s going to pass both chambers with overwhelming support, nothing will change that!Megan Cassella, 12-10-2019, "Trump, House Democrats strike deal on updated NAFTA, setting stage for a vote," POLITICO, handed President Donald Trump a political win Tuesday with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's announcement that Democrats have reached a deal with the administration on the new North American trade agreement. The deal coincides with House Democrats unveiling two articles of impeachment against the president, and edges Trump closer to victory on a signature 2016 campaign promise with the trade deal. Trump applauded the progress on the agreement, saying it would be "the best and most important trade deal ever made by the USA" and predicted broad Democratic support. The deal on the trade pact gives moderate Democrats a win to tout at home. News of the deal indicates that congressional Democrats, who have been negotiating changes with U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, are now largely satisfied with the deal's labor, environmental, enforcement and drug pricing provisions. Lighthizer and Canadian Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland will sign the revised deal in Mexico City on Tuesday afternoon. “It’s a victory for America’s workers," Pelosi said at a press conference announcing the deal. "It’s one we take great pride in advancing.” The AFL-CIO, the nation's largest labor federation, also came out in support of the agreement on Tuesday, marking the first time the influential group has endorsed a pact in nearly two decades. Some of the top demands Democrats wanted for months appear to have made it into the final version of the U.S-Mexico-Canada Agreement, including a provision that allows American inspectors to enter Mexican factories to check for labor violations. Democrats also succeeded in pushing the Trump administration to remove a provision establishing a 10-year protection period for biologic drugs, which opponents say would allow drug companies to keep prices high. The compromise clears the way for Congress to vote on the pact in the coming weeks, where it is expected to pass both chambers with broad support. Democrats do have a window to vote for USMCA this year as the House Ways and Means Committee is expected to waive its time on mock-ups to send the deal straight to the floor for a vote. Some senior Democrats speculated that a vote for USMCA could come Dec. 19, the day after the House is expected to vote on impeachment. Pelosi already has said she does not want impeachment to be the last thing members vote on before the holiday recess. "This is a transformative agreement," said House Ways and Means Chairman Richard Neal, who led negotiations with the Trump administration. "It's a template, I believe, for future agreements."RIP Your USMCA DisadJacob Pramuk, 12-10-2019, “House Democrats and the White House have a deal to move forward with USMCA trade agreement,” CNBC, Democrats and the Trump administration have reached an agreement to move forward with the White House’s replacement for the North American Free Trade Agreement, top Democrats said Tuesday. The two sides had worked for more than a year to resolve Democratic concerns about enforcement tools for labor and environmental standards under the new deal, known as the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. House Democrats, President Donald Trump, top Senate Republicans and labor leaders all cited progress toward a deal this week. The Trump administration needs to submit ratifying legislation to Congress for the House to move forward with approving the agreement. Once the White House submits text — it could do so in the coming days — a 90-day window to approve USMCA starts. The three countries are expected to sign the revised agreement Tuesday.RIP USMCAEmily Cochrane and Ana Swanson, 12-10-2019, "Trump Aides and Democrats Strike Deal on North American Trade Pact," No Publication, — House Democrats said Tuesday they had reached an agreement with the White House to strengthen labor, environmental, pharmaceutical and enforcement provisions in President Trump’s North American trade pact, a significant development that moves the president’s signature trade deal closer to becoming law. The agreement, announced Tuesday by Speaker Nancy Pelosi, comes at an odd moment as the same group of House Democrats moved closer toward impeaching the president. Ms. Pelosi of California said she would allow the deal to move forward in the House, handing the administration one of its biggest legislative victories less than an hour after she announced the articles of impeachment against Mr. Trump. The decision to proceed with the United States-Mexico-Canada-Agreement came after Democrats said they secured concessions from the White House to strengthen provisions in a trade pact that governs commerce across North America. Those changes were critical to winning the support of labor unions, including the powerful AFL-CIO. The changes to USMCA, which the three countries signed more than a year ago, must now be woven into implementing legislation that the House and Senate will both vote on. The pact will also need to secure the president’s signature and the final approval of the Mexican senate and Canadian leadership. At a news conference on Tuesday, Ms. Pelosi, flanked by Democrats including Massachusetts Representative Richard E. Neal, said that they were confident that the legislation would become law, replacing the much-maligned North American Free Trade Agreement and fulfilling a legislative priority for both the administration and the House Democratic caucus. “It is infinitely better than what was initially proposed by the administration,” Ms. Pelosi said. “It’s a victory for America’s workers.”Mexico Approved the ChangesMexico Approved the ChangesAssociated Press, 12-12-2019, "Mexican Senate Ratifies Changes to USMCA Trade Pact," No Publication, CITY — Mexico's Senate voted Thursday to approve the modifications negotiated this week to the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, known as the USMCA. The Senate vote of 107 to 1 gave approval to increased enforcement of labor and environmental rules. The vote clears the way for a revamped version of the 25-year-old North American free trade agreement to take effect, after the U.S. and Canada ratify the modifications. Mexico agreed to dispute resolution panels to ensure its workers can organize and demand better wages. Democrats in the U.S. Congress have hailed the changes. In the past, corrupt Mexican unions have signed low-wage contracts behind workers' backs. Critics say Mexico's low wages have played a big role in luring manufacturing jobs south, especially in the auto industry.It’s Still a ThingSenate won’t vote on it until JanuaryRyan Lovelace, 12-10-2019, "Senate poised to pass legislation on defense, trade, spending as impeachment trial looms ahead," Washington Times, gaining ground was the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement on trade. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Trump administration announced an agreement Tuesday morning soon after House Democrats detailed their impeachment plans. But Mr. McConnell told reporters Tuesday afternoon that the Senate would not consider USMCA before breaking for the Christmas holiday. “We will not be doing USMCA in the Senate between now and the end of next week,” Mr. McConnell said. “That will have to come up in all likelihood right after the [potential impeachment] trial is finished in the?Senate.” ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download