Budgetary pressure may force the military to change the way it procures communications and information systems. The result may be the elimination of duplicative systems and interoperability problems.

Lt. Gen. Robert Shea, USMC (Ret.), executive vice president, Smartronix, former J-6, the Joint Staff, pointed out that, too often, respective services build different systems for similar capabilities at the operations level. Budgetary pressures may render that approach a luxury, and thereby force military planners to do some of the things that the services and agencies haven’t been doing themselves.

Gen. Shea told the audience at a TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009 panel on defining requirements that, to ensure that the right capabilities reach the user, requirements people should be kept tightly engaged throughout the entire process. They should be part of any discussions of tradeoffs, he emphasized.

The adage of “train the way you fight” isn’t working for Marines using communications and networking systems. The result is that personnel have to learn how to use vital command, control and communications (C3) gear in the field, which hinders their effectiveness in a combat zone.

Master Sgt. Glenn A. Brown, USMC, operations chief, Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force (MAGTF)–Afghanistan, called for pre-deployment training on the same hardware and software that will be used in the field. Speaking at a TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009 panel on defining requirements for equipping the warfighter, the master sergeant declared that Marines are not training on the same applications.

“If we can work on networks here and deploy that way in theater, then I don’t have to worry about that when I get into theater,” he said. “I already know how to do my job.”

He also expressed a desire for a mobile modular command and control (C2) vehicle. This vehicle would require less packing and provide a C2 capability with different levels of security.

The top priority for the U.S. Pacific Fleet is not merely command and control, it is command and control of command and control (C2C2). That is the assessment delivered by Rear Adm. Scott Van Buskirk, USN, deputy commander and chief of staff, U.S. Pacific Fleet.

Speaking to the Thursday luncheon audience at TechNet Asia Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii, November 2-5, Adm. Buskirk said that the operationalization of C2C2 is a major element of work underway in his command. He described four elements: theater sensing/intelligence; network architecture, including cyber; commander’s decision aids that compile transmitted data into useful information; and network protection.

The importance of this discipline lies in the fact that it affects virtually every communications and networking activity. The admiral said that the calling “is now about information domain and denial—ID2.”

The lack of C2C2 automation tools is a challenge, and he urged industry to remedy that shortcoming. “Command and control of command and control is an extremely fertile ground that bears harvesting,” the admiral stated.

The U.S. Marine Corps is ramping up to conduct operations in cyberspace as part of its everyday capabilities. Marine Air Ground Task Forces (MAGTFs) will operate in cyberspace as they do on land, sea and air, according to the head of U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific.

Lt. Gen. Keith J. Stalder, USMC, commander of the U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific, allowed that cyberwarfare normally is not associated with the Marines. Nonetheless, the Corps is moving into training and making investments in cyberwarfare capabilities and facilities, he told the Thursday breakfast audience at TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009 in Honolulu, Hawaii.

A Marine cyber headquarters already has been established, and one company of Marines will serve there. Lt. Gen. George Flynn, USMC, will serve as a component commander to Lt. Gen. Keith G. Alexander, USA, director of the National Security Agency, who has been nominated for promotion to general and assignment as head of the U.S. Cyber Command.

Technological solutions can bridge differences between the U.S. forces and other nations as the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) builds relationships among its diverse partners. The Marine Corps in particular are seeking translation technologies to break down language barriers in daily activities.

Lt. Gen. Keith J. Stalder, USMC, commander of the U.S. Marine Corps Forces Pacific, told the Thursday breakfast audience at TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009 that the Pacific is a critical part of our nation’s economic and strategic well being. Accordingly, the Marines actively engage officials with many nations in the region on behalf of PACOM. “We bridge coalition language barriers every day,” he said. Having something as simple as a translation tool for PowerPoint slides would be immensely helpful, he added.

Part of that engagement involves learning about the challenges confronting other nations; and, unfortunately, some familiar problems are extending their reach. Gen. Stalder related that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) are appearing in Pacific Rim nations—he cited Southern Thailand as one problem site. He described IED defeat as his top technology requirement, noting that he loses more Marines to IEDs in Afghanistan than in Iraq.

The general also listed mine countermeasures technology as well as shallow-water intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance as important technology needs.

The information technology arena is experiencing large tectonic shifts that are directly affecting requirements for cybersecurity. Transitions—from physical to virtual; from the premise to the cloud; from more formal networks to social networks—will have their counterparts in new security requirements and approaches.

According to Don Proctor, senior vice president, Software Group, Cisco, innovation should be a strategy for managing risk. Speaking at an industry panel on cybersecurity at TechNet Asia Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii, November 2-5, he said that the threat is dynamic, not static. “We’re playing a cat and mouse game.”

We need a process based on innovation that helps us keep ahead of our adversaries, he stated. But that innovation is not reaching the security realm easily. Proctor said that the “innovation gap” must be reduced. Today’s processes mean that, by definition, we are deploying technology that is two or three years old. Our adversaries are not encumbered by that process, he added.

Government needs to “think flat’ and create a cybersecurity architecture that emphasizes a peering structure rather than a vertical architecture.

Robert J. Giesler, vice president and corporate executive agent for cyber programs, SAIC, expanded on that statement while moderating an industry panel on cybersecurity at TechNet Asia Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii, November 2-5. He stated that cyber operations centers should have a peer relationship rather than a hierarchical one. The hierarchical approach generates layers of decision making and latency.

Giesler added that decision processes between public and private sectors can be hindered by regulation instead of facilitated by it. For example, since 2002, $40 billion has been spent on FISMA compliance—and that’s just to tell us how badly we’re doing, he stated. He asked, if government is going to regulate cyber security, are we just buying into more bureaucracy?

The rise of China and the growth of other Asian economies could hold serious consequences for the U.S. economy, and subsequently relations with other countries. One day, major world economies no longer will use the dollar as the basis for international transactions. And when the U.S. dollar no longer is the global currency of choice, the United States will have to enter a period of severe frugality.

This scenario was offered by Dr. Denny Roy, senior fellow and supervisor of POSCO Fellowship Program, East-West Center. Speaking in a panel on the Pacific Rim at TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii November 2-5, Roy explained that the United States will not be able to continue its current fiscal policies under the huge debt it carries, and the result will be permanent belt-tightening.

China, with its fast-growing economy, soon will diversify its investments and its markets so it won’t have to rely on the U.S. market as much as it does now. That will give it economic and political flexibility. Currently, China would be harmed if it were to sever the economic relationship between the two economic superpowers. That becomes less of a problem with global diversification.

Smaller Asian nations are worried about U.S. economic power fading. Adm. Thomas B. Fargo, USN (Ret.), former commander, U.S. Pacific Command, offered in the same panel that they are concerned about the U.S. debt. These smaller nations fear that the belt-tightening forced by debt service will reduce the U.S. ability to deal with them on a continuing basis. They worry that the United States may not be able to maintain its interests in Asia, Adm. Fargo related.

China and the United States are constantly redefining their relationship in a dynamic that could lead to conflict if both sides are not careful, according to a leading U.S. Asia-Pacific expert. Dr. Denny Roy, senior fellow and supervisor of POSCO Fellowship Program, East-West Center, warned that the evolution of this relationship matches past patterns that have led to confrontation.

Speaking in a panel on the Pacific Rim at TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii November 2-5, Roy said that the implications of the rise of China are extremely profound. What is particularly worrisome is that the situation that both nations are marching toward is similar to past patterns of what he calls “a hegemonic transition.” This involves the rise of a new power that can replace an existing power as the dominant one.

This transition can be dangerous because the older hegemonic power has the incentive to start a war so that it does not lose its power. Conversely, the rising power has the incentive to start a war so that it can realize the fruits of its efforts sooner.

Roy emphasized that China is not Nazi Germany nor fascist Japan in the 1930s. Plus, China does agree with many basic U.S. tenets of global relations, such as free trade.

But, China does not support democracy movements throughout Asia. It would like to reduce the importance of the U.S. dollar in global trade. And, China does not like the U.S. security alliances throughout the region, Roy said.

The U.S. Army, Pacific, is pushing technological limits to link its diverse elements. While it has had some successes, it still needs some breakthrough technologies to achieve its goals over the vast region, according to Brig. Gen. Alan R. Lynn, USA, commander, 311th Signal Command.

Speaking during the Wednesday breakfast and keynote address at TechNet Asia-Pacific 2009, being held in Honolulu, Hawaii November 2-5, Gen. Lynn outlined his U.S. Army, Pacific, (USARPAC) wish list:

—less expensive, lighter, energy-efficient and less-manpower-intensive integrated systems
—a smart network that automatically mitigates and or corrects workstations’ IA issues/problems
—a cross domain solution for multilevel security
—and plug-and-play software that enables disparate networks to communicate without information assurance problems.

Gen. Lynn also called for communications on-the-move that are less obvious on the battlefield. Currently, vehicles are equipped with large dome antennas that scream “shoot me,” he said. He called upon industry to develop higher bandwidth systems that use phased array antennas.