This post previously appeared in Defense News and C4SIR.
Although the threats from China and elsewhere are clear and present, there is no agreement on the type of adversary we will face. how we will fight, organize and train; And what weapons or systems will be needed in future combat. Instead, developing new principles to deal with these new problems is fraught with disagreement, differing goals, and incumbents defending the status quo. But a change in military doctrine is coming. Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks is walking a competing tightrope to make that happen. Hopefully on time.
From left, Skydio CEO Adam Bry presents the company for Deputy Secretary of Defense Kathleen Hicks and Defense Innovation Agency Director Doug Beck during a visit to the company’s facility in San Mateo, California. demonstrating autonomous system technology. (Sgt. Alexander Kubitza / U.S. Navy)
There are several theories about how innovations in military doctrine and new operational concepts arise. Some argue that new doctrines emerge when civilians step in to support military “dictators,” such as the Goldwater-Nichols Act. Alternatively, military services can create innovation internally when senior military officers recognize the doctrinal and operational implications of new capabilities such as Rickover and the Nuclear Navy.
But today, innovation in doctrine and concepts is driven by four main factors: Out A cataclysm that simultaneously threatens our military and economic advantages:
- China offers a variety of asymmetric offset strategies.
- China possesses an unprecedented number of naval, space and air assets.
- The proven value of numerous expendable unmanned systems on the Ukrainian battlefield.
- Rapid technological change in artificial intelligence, autonomy, cyber, space, biotechnology, semiconductors, hypersonics, etc. is being driven by commercial enterprises in the United States and China.
The need for change
The Department of Defense’s traditional sources of innovation (Prime, FFRDC, and Service Laboratories) are no longer sufficient to keep pace.
The speed, depth, and breadth of these disruptive changes will occur faster than the responsiveness and agility of current acquisition systems and defense industrial bases. But in the decade since these external threats emerged, DoD’s doctrine, organization, culture, processes, and tolerance for risk have largely operated as if no changes were needed.
As a result, DoD has a world-class workforce and organization for a world that no longer exists.
It’s not that the Department of Defense doesn’t know how to innovate on the battlefield. In Iraq and Afghanistan, innovative crisis-driven organizations such as the Joint Improvised-Threat Defeat Agency and the Army’s Rapid Equipment Force emerged. And the military circumvented its own bureaucracy by creating offices of rapid prowess. Even today, the Ukrainian Security Support Group continues to quickly supply weapons.
Unfortunately, these efforts are isolated, temporary, and disappear once the immediate crisis ends. DoD rarely makes permanent changes.
Several significant signs of change over the past year show that DoD is serious about changing the way it operates and radically overhauling its doctrines, concepts, and weapons.
First, the Defense Innovation Group was promoted to directly report to the Minister of National Defense. The budget and reporting structure, previously buried in a research and engineering organization with a $35 million budget, was a sign of how little the Department of Defense recognized the importance of commercial innovation.
Now that DIU has been rescued from obscurity, a new executive director, Doug Beck, takes over as chair of the Deputy Innovation Steering Group. This group oversees defense efforts to rapidly deploy advanced technological capabilities to solve urgent operational problems. DIU also deployed staff to the Navy and U.S. Indo-Pacific Command to identify real, urgent needs.
The House Appropriations Committee also signaled the importance of DIU by proposing $1 billion in the fiscal year 2024 budget to fund these efforts. And the Navy has signaled its intention to fully participate in the DIU through the creation of the Disruptive Capability Office.
Additionally, Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks unveiled the Replicator plan to deploy thousands of vulnerable autonomous systems (e.g., drones in the air, underwater, and under the sea) within the next 18 to 24 months. This initiative is the first test of the Undersecretary’s Transformation Operations Group’s ability to deliver autonomous systems to the warfighter at speed and scale while breaking down organizational barriers. DIU will work with the new company to address anti-access/area denial issues.
Replicator is not only a harbinger of a fundamental doctrinal change in the DoD, but also a clear signal to the defense industrial base that DoD is serious about procuring components faster, cheaper, and with shorter shelf lives.
Lastly, at the recent Reagan Defense Forum, it felt like the world had been turned upside down. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin mentioned DIU in his keynote speech, and after visiting the Silicon Valley headquarters, he visited Reagan and met with innovative companies. In many panels, senior officers and senior defense officials used the words “disruption,” “innovation,” “speed,” and “urgency” multiple times to signal that they really mean it and want it.
Among the audience were numerous venture and private capital fund leaders looking for ways to build companies that can quickly deliver innovative capabilities.
Noticeably, unlike previous years, the conference’s sponsor banners were not incumbent Prime Ministers, but rebels, namely new potential Prime Ministers such as Palantir and Anduril. The Ministry of Defense has woken up. We realize that new and growing threats require rapid change. Otherwise, we may not win the next dispute.
Change is especially difficult in military doctrine. (Just ask the Marine Corps.) Established suppliers don’t spend the night quietly, and new suppliers almost always underestimate the difficulty and complexity of the job. Established organizations defend their budgets, headcount, and authority. Organizational saboteurs resist change. But our enemies do not wait for our multi-decade plans.
But you can do more
- Congress and the military can support change by fully funding the Replicator initiative and the Defense Innovation Unit.
- The service does not have a procurement budget for Replicator and must redirect existing funds to unmanned and AI programs.
- The Department of Defense must translate its new innovation processes into real, tangible orders for new companies.
- And other warfighter commands must follow what INDOPACOM is doing.
- Additionally, defense companies should collaborate more actively with startups.
Change is happening. Deputy Secretary of Defense Hicks is building a coalition determined to get it done.
I hope you wake up on time.
Filed Under: National Security |
