Defense Security Cooperation Agency: Defense Solutions for America's Global Partners

U.S. Department of Defense

Defense Security Cooperation Agency

Defense Solutions for America’s Global Partners

Making a Difference in the World

CLOSE COMBAT

INDIRECT FIRE

DIRECT FIRE

Day & Zimmermann is proud to manufacture the highest quality ammunition available today -- a mission critical function we have supported for more than 70 years. With a diverse portfolio of production facilities and complementary capabilities that include Load, Assemble, Pack (LAP), storage and demilitarization, we get the job done safely and with integrity.

Day & Zimmermann facilities are ISO 9000 certified and our products undergo comprehensive testing and evaluation to ensure that only the highest quality and safest munitions are produced. Day & Zimmermann munitions are built to consistently exceed the requirements of the U.S. Department of Defense.

ENERGETICS & COMPONENTS

Worldwide Headquarters: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. Telephone: (215) 299-8000

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

dayzim.com

aollc.biz

WHEN VITAL INTELLIGENCE DEPENDS ON YOU, WE’RE RIGHT ALONGSIDE. Goodrich has a proud track record of successful partnership with the DSCA and we’d like to take this opportunity to thank them for the pivotal role they play.

Goodrich makes hundreds of vital systems, such as the DB-110 digital, real-time, tactical reconnaissance system for a huge range of military aircraft. What makes us special? Long experience as a defense supplier, innovative designs and, above all, a can-do attitude. You can depend on us.

www.goodrich.com

right attitude/right approach/right alongside

Table Of Contents Interview with DSCA Director Vice Adm. William E. Landay III......................................................................... 8

By J.R. Wilson

Defense Security Cooperation Agency. . .................................................................................................................. 14 An Overview

By J.R. Wilson

Air Force Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate.............................................................................. 24

By Scott R. Gourley

Navy International Programs Office. . ....................................................................................................................... 28

By Scott R. Gourley

U.S. Army Security Assistance Command..................................................................................................................... 32

By Scott R. Gourley

Foreign Military Sales and Foreign Military Financing........................................................................................ 40

By J.R. Wilson

The Voice of the COCOMs in Security Cooperation............................................................................................. 48 Interview with Brig. Gen. Maryanne Miller, Deputy Director for Partnership Strategy

By Jan Tegler

International Military Education and Training....................................................................................................... 52

By J.R. Wilson

The Foreign Policy View............................................................................................................................... .............. 60 Interview with Andrew J. Shapiro, Assistant Secretary, U.S. State Department Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

By Eric Tegler

Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief, and Mine Action. . ............................................................... .............. 66

By J.R. Wilson

U.S. Army and Air Force Secretariats Lead Sales, Security, and Technology Transfer................... .............. 72

By Eric Tegler

The ABCs of Security Cooperation: DISAM and DIILS......................................................................................... 78

By Jan Tegler

Executive Agent.. .......................................................................................................................................................... 84 DSCA Supports the Regional Centers’ Security Cooperation Network-building Mission

By Jan Tegler

Continuing in Service.................................................................................................................................................. 90 The Enduring Value of Excess Defense Articles

By J.R. Wilson

THE UNSPOKEN BOND BETWEEN ALLIES.

Keeps coalition forces operating as one.

MIDS LVT and future-focused MIDS JTRS capability In a constantly shifting battle space, you need Link 16 capability that can keep coalition warfighters operating as one prepared and aware force. Data Link Solutions (DLS) has more than 20 years of Link 16 experience and provides all MIDS LVT Link 16 terminal variants. DLS is the sole provider of the fighter data link and high-power applications. We offer innovative, interoperable, flexible and reliable solutions for Link 16 net-centric connectivity, where and when it counts most. Solutions to meet changing platform requirements and global support within one supply chain.

To learn more, contact us at 319.295.4357 or visit us at datalinksolutions.net.

U.S. Department of Defense

Defense Security Cooperation Agency Defense Solutions for America’s Global Partners

Published by Faircount Media Group 701 N. West Shore Blvd.

Tampa, FL 33609 Tel: 813.639.1900 www.faircount.com www.defensemedianetwork.com EDITORIAL Consulting Editor: Charles Taylor Editor in Chief: Chuck Oldham Managing Editor: Ana E. Lopez Editor: Rhonda Carpenter Editor: Iwalani Kahikina Assistant Editor/Photo Editor: Steven Hoarn Contributing Writers: Scott R. Gourley, Eric Tegler, Jan Tegler, J.R. Wilson DESIGN AND PRODUCTION Art Director: Robin K. McDowall Designer: Daniel Mrgan Designer: Lorena Noya Designer: Kenia Y. Perez-Ayala Ad Traffic Manager: Rebecca Laborde

ADVERTISING Ad Sales Manager: Steve Chidel Account Executives: Michael Blomberg, Art Dubuc, Jim Huston, Jay Powers OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION Chief Operating Officer: Lawrence Roberts VP, Business Development: Robin Jobson Business Development Executive: Damion Harte Financial Controller: Robert John Thorne Chief Information Officer: John Madden Circulation: Alexis Vars Lead Developer: Clyde Sanchez Internet Marketing/SEO: Brian Melanson IT Administrator: Anson Alexander Events Manager: Jim Huston Executive Assistant: Lindsey Brooks FAIRCOUNT MEDIA GROUP Publisher, North America: Ross Jobson Publisher, Europe: Peter Antell

As a Veteran Owned business, we understand the challenges of military life when it comes to temporary assignments and moving.

BOQ is ready to help ease the challenges with finding comfortable, affordable and safe housing; always at or below Per Diem.

We are standing by to assist!

1‐800‐267‐1159 BOQ isn’t just lodging, we are Housing Solution Experts!

Contract # GS‐33F‐0010V

©Copyright Faircount LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction of editorial content in whole or in part without written permission is prohibited. Faircount LLC does not assume responsibility for the advertisements, nor any representation made therein, nor the quality or deliverability of the products themselves. Reproduction of articles and photographs, in whole or in part, contained herein is prohibited without expressed written consent of the publisher, with the exception of reprinting for news media use. Printed in the United States of America. Permission to use various images and text in this publication was obtained from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, and in no way is used to imply an endorsement by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency, or any Department of Defense entity for any claims or representations therein. None of the advertising contained herein implies U.S. government, Department of Defense, or Defense Security Cooperation Agency endorsement of any private entity or enterprise.

Call 1‐800‐BOQ‐1159 or visit our web site at www.boqinc.com

Interview with

DSCA Director Vice Adm. William E. Landay III

By j.r. wilson

T

J.R. Wilson: From a broad-brush philosophy perspective, what are DSCA’s primary objectives in support of the security of the United States and U.S. military across the globe?

8

so when we do come together we can accomplish our missions.

Finally, support the larger U.S. effort to build relationships with other countries. For us, that is mostly on the military side.

How did DSCA support to the unique challenges in Iraq and Afghanistan affect the overall defense Security Assistance process?

Vice Adm. William E. Landay III: We’re primarily responsible for overseeing and managing the majority of Security Cooperation programs for DoD. Security Cooperation has four primary goals, and we focus on ensuring all those goals are accomplished.

First, it provides support for countries to enable them to be able to secure their own borders against all threats, including terrorism.

Second, to ensure interoperability between U.S. military forces and those of our partner countries. We know, today and in the future, we will operate together, and the ability to do so is critical. That includes equipment that can communicate with other [equipment], how each of us operates, training doctrine, etc. So the training piece is just as important as the equipment.

Third, is developing military-tomilitary cooperation. Through that we build an understanding of each other and a confidence in how both operate,

What Iraq and Afghanistan did for the FMS [Foreign Military Sales] process was put a demand for urgency and flexibility into the system that probably did not exist as strongly in the past.

We were directly supporting combat operations and the country’s ability to conduct combat operations, so we had to make the system work faster and be more responsive.

We have been a ble to do t hat throughout the system for other nations, as well. So the system today is much more responsive, flexible and capable than even in the 2005-06 timeframe.

How does DSCA interface with DoD as a whole?

Taking FMS as a great example of that, it, and Security Cooperation in general, are really focused on building and maintaining relationships between countries and militaries. So much of our involvement is consistent with the goals, strategies, and strategic objectives of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy and the Joint Chiefs.

However, much of what we do is providing equipment, goods, services, capabilities, which we do through the DoD acquisition process.

U.S. Navy photo

he Defense Secu r it y Cooperation Agency (DSCA) plays a key role in U.S. foreign relations, national security, and global security, yet may be one of the least known and understood parts of the Department of Defense (DoD).

DSCA’s mission is to provide timely and effective direction, supervision, and oversight of Security Cooperation (SC) programs in support of U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. In so doing, DSCA seeks, through its established security cooperation and other activities, to enhance U.S. influence in all regions of the globe, carry out U.S. national security strategy, and promote military interoperability with foreign partners.

These programs include training and education; disaster relief; and helping friendly nations acquire the right military equipment to meet their security needs.

All of that is often coordinated with DoD, State, U.S. military regional combatant commands (COCOMs), recipient nations, individual U.S. military services, allies, U.S. industry, Congress, and more.

As DSCA’s director since August 2010, Vice Adm. William E. Landay III is responsible for coordinating all of the agency’s efforts, including working to ensure and balance the needs and requirements of one of the most diverse sets of “stakeholders” facing any military leader. He recently discussed the DSCA operations with senior writer J.R. Wilson.

How does DSCA work with the COCOMs? Ou r primary focus there is the regional COCOMs. Their goals and objectives, their theater Security Cooperation plans and their efforts to build relationships with each country in their region provide the framework which we work to support. In addition to routine discussions on a daily basis at the staff level, I generally go at least twice a year to all COCOMs and sit down with their senior leadership to make sure we understand what their requirements are. We also have a program where the COCOMs identify key SC cases that are their highest priority and we bring the DSCA and service implementing agencies together monthly to ensure their cases are being executed satisfactorily.

What is the nature of DSCA’s connection with the State Department?

State ha s t he U.S. gover n ment responsibility for broad oversight for all Security Assistance programs.

There are some additional programs for which DoD has primary responsibility, but most are overseen by State. So we execute for the State Department, and under its authority, programs such as FMF [Foreign Military Financing], FMS, IMET [International Military Education and Training], etc.

We have a very tight connection with them – primarily through their PoliticalMilitary Affairs [Pol-Mil] bureau – in terms of making sure we comply with their guidance, provide input on how we see the system can be used or modified, work with them to notify Congress when required on a sale, etc.

U.S. Army photo by Miguel A. Negron

Does that also apply to ambassadors and envoys?

Yes, we work closely w it h ou r Security Cooperation Offices in the em bassies as wel l as the cou ntr y teams. I always meet with them whenever I visit a country. We also sit down with the ambassador to ensure we are working together on their goals and what they are trying to accomplish in that country. We fund a Security Cooperation Office in almost every embassy. Their charter is to work directly w ith the country and the embassy on SC cases and issues.

What is DSCA’s relationship with the individual armed services?

They are critical key partners.

Through them we execute the Security Cooperation programs in terms of providing equipment, training, services, etc. So the services and other implementing agencies are the engines that drive these programs because, in the end, they provide the capabilities we are offering to these countries.

They also have their own goals in each nation and region, so we take aboard service objectives, as well. But it really is the tight linkage we have in terms of executing the programs; we could not do this without the efforts of the services.

What about working with allies?

Quite frankly, that relationship generally occurs more through the COCOMs, State and OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense], who build the strategy for a region and how the U.S. will work with our foreign partners in an area. Our job is to support their strategies.

How does DSCA interface with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs)?

Humanitarian assistance is a major program area within DSCA. There is a wide range of humanitarian efforts and programs we support. We often work those in partnership with NGOs and other relief agencies. Under our Disaster

U.S. Army Sgt. 1st Class Andres FloresPerez, from the Texas Army National Guard Personnel Recovery Operations Training Team, explains land navigation to Guatemalan soldiers from the 6th Guatemalan Army Brigade during a subject-matter expert exchange in Coban, Guatemala, on Feb. 28, 2012.

Relief authorities, when a disaster does occur such as the earthquake in Haiti, our disaster relief organization, working closely with USAID and other government agencies as well as NGOs and other relief agencies, determines how best to support the needs of that nation.

Often that is providing transport of relief materials. So we work with them to determine how the U.S. can help, then work with our services to determine how best to execute that assistance.

What is the working relationship with the host nations themselves?

They have a lot of input. They set the requirements, tell us what they need, and when and how they plan to use it. In most cases, they also provide the money.

In some cases, the U.S. government will provide equipment and resources, but for the vast majority, the host nation comes to us with their needs and funding, seeking to partner with us to meet their needs. So we work very closely with them.

9

What changes to Security Assistance are you seeing/anticipating as the U.S. focus begins to shift to Africa and Asia/Pacific?

And to enhancing interoperability with U.S. forces in maintaining a global military presence, from training exercises to coalition combat operations?

Because Security Cooperation is about building partnerships, we already have many programs that are underway in those areas. Our emphasis is on trying to build on existing programs and relationships, maybe expand or broaden them, but ultimately to maintain and build on programs we have been maintaining in the past; and at the same time, where opportunities exist to develop new relationships or renew previous ones, we will work to do so.

In this world of coalition operations, it is absolutely critical. The one thing we know is the U.S. military by itself is not going to be in a position to address every issue around the world and does not desire to address issues alone. So we will operate with partners, whether in combat operations such as Afghanistan and Iraq, or counterpiracy off the coast of Somalia or counternarcotics or counterterrorism.

To ef fect ively operate toget her requires being able to talk with each other, understand each other, and know how each country operates. So, as a result, a lot of our Security Cooperation efforts are not just focused on equipment, but also training and education.

We are most effective when we go the same schools together, and exercise together, building camaraderie between militaries and individuals. So when we do come together for an operation, we have the confidence to know we can work together to address the mission.

What is the nature of Security Cooperation efforts in Latin America – and what changes are taking place or anticipated there?

Again, I don’t believe there will be any significant changes. The U.S. and certainly DoD, through many of its Security Cooperation initiatives, has had a robust presence in parts of Central and South America for some time. Much of that has been driven by issues such as counter-narcotics, or illicit trafficking, and I expect us to continue putting a strong emphasis on those. As some of those nations’ militaries continue to develop, we will expand our Security Cooperation and assistance programs to support their needs.

Overall, how important is building partner capacity (BPC) – even with those who are not traditional U.S. partners – to the national security of the United States?

It’s very important. Part of the reason we want to build partnership capacity – which is ensuring those nations have the ability to secure their own borders against a variety of threats – is that it shows up in a number of ways, not just military, but enabling a more stable economy, attracting new business to come in as the area is more stable, which improves global trade. So even if they are not traditional partners or major military partners, building partner capacity has advantages to the U.S. in a number of areas – not just in terms of military aid, but building relationships and helping other parts of the global economy to work there as well; all of which is in our best interests.

How are the concept and processes of BPC changing – and where do you see that going through the end of this decade and beyond?

I have seen a lot of changes, mainly as the U.S. government has focused more and more effort into the area of Security Cooperation and Building Partner Capacity, recognizing there is much more we need to do than we were doing in the past. So, we have seen a growth in programs and authorities to specifically go after areas of Security Cooperation and BPC that we were not able to do in the past. That includes greater flexibility and responsiveness to address individual nation issues.

How will NATO’s “smart defense” concept and cap on member nation defense budgets af fect Secu r ity A ssistance ef forts, especial ly in Eastern Europe?

There are a couple of areas there. In Eastern Europe, there are opportunities for us to work with them to help develop or modernize their capabilities as they move into the next generation of equipment, whether it is U.S. or NATO-origin

equipment that obviously enhances interoperability.

As budgets get tighter, we expect to see countries looking to partner with other countries to provide a capability or focus on niche elements of Security Assistance. As a result, we must be prepared to support both individual country capacity requirements as well as multi-country initiatives. Since our FMS system has been primarily a bilateral process, we are working to adapt to this new reality.

If tighter budgets among our major allies reduces their role in global Security Assistance, what do you expect FMS, FMF, IMET, and other DSCA efforts to look like through the next decade?

I think they will continue to be very highly regarded and sought after.

Certainly FMF and IMET are U.S.-funded security assistance programs, which will see pressure from our own budget challenges. We are working very hard with State, the services, and other agencies to define, as well as possible, the benefits we derive from those programs, which I think are clearly seen in terms of BPC and building relationships; and I think we will continue to see them as key parts of our Security Cooperation efforts as we go forward.

How are you changing or expecting to modify those efforts with respect to poorer nations, which often have far more basic needs?

Those are key components of building BPC. People tend to get enamored with the big dollar sales and programs, but we have established thousands of programs with more than 224 nations and international organizations around the world, from very well-off nations to those just starting to emerge or who are just developing professional militaries. So we are able to tailor our cooperation efforts across a wide range of needs. Often those initiatives start with training, helping them build institutions within the country, outfit their militaries – all of which are often just as important to building our relationships as selling a country a ship or an aircraft.

For example, a program we began last year involved sending ERGTs [Exped itionar y Req u i rements Generation Teams] to sit down early

11

in the process with nations, especially [a nation] trying to determine what capability it needs and how much money it will have. We also bring in the State Department and other agencies to help determine what might meet a country’s needs without going with the most expensive solution. In the past, nations had to figure that out pretty much by themselves, but now we bring all our people in to sit down with their best people to determine what they want to accomplish – rather than what they might like to buy.

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Melissa K. Mekpongsatorn

While many people think of Security Assistance only in terms of military equipment, what are the scope and intent of DSCA’s Humanitarian and Disaster Relief and efforts to help deal with land mines?

Humanitarian and Disaster Relief is a DoD program, with projects generally coming out of embassy country teams and the COCOMs, who make proposals for efforts to help a given nation address its humanitarian needs.

That can range from building roads to equipping hospitals, digging wells, and in some cases helping a country put in place the ability to coordinate their response to a disaster before the disaster occurs.

It is very powerful when we help a nation support itself.

When it is in response to a disaster, it’s a bit different – how can we provide support, including to NGOs and other relief agencies. Typically, that is money on our part, funding military disaster relief and helping facilitate those efforts.

We have three warehouses around the world with emergency meals and supplies we can tap into as needed.

On mine action, we have a school under DSCA to teach countries that are dealing with mines strewn about from previous conflicts how to find and eliminate those mines. We don’t find or eliminate them ourselves, but train them on how to do so and how to train others in their own countries.

One of the areas that we have been focused on as a result of our efforts to support Security Cooperation efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan is how we can deliver equipment more quickly to our customers – a key component of our effort to be more flexible and responsive.

To meet countries’ equipment requests, we use the existing DoD acquisition system and processes. Because the U.S. tends to have longer range planning and budgeting timelines, that process does not always support a partner country’s needs. So we looked at ways we might be able to get the equipment to them quickly, even if we could not speed up the acquisition process. We found that in many cases we knew the requirement was coming, but would wait until we received the formal request before we would even begin actions with the acquisition program managers. We thought that if we could identify items that were going to be bought and could start the procurement process even as the formal requests were being developed, we could potentially take months off of the time it would take to get the equipment to the country. Obviously if a country did not make the formal request, we would have equipment we needed to find a buyer for, but we thought if we emphasized highvolume items that multiple countries were expected to buy, we would be able to manage that issue. So we focused specifically on high-demand items such as radios, spare parts, small arms, body armor, etc., and implemented the Special Defense Acquisition Fund. While we are in our first year of this effort and much of the equipment is still in production, we have already had three cases where we were able to significantly improve

Four Afghan Air Force flight students from class 91-02 and their U.S. instructors prepare to fly MD-530F helicopters during undergraduate helicopter training Aug. 29, 2012, at Shindand Air Base, Afghanistan.

our ability to meet a country’s needs through this process.

Any final thoughts?

A ll of our Security Cooperation programs are vitally important to our ability to build strong relationships with our partner nations. Through the efforts of many people in DSCA, the services and other agencies, we have been able to improve the flexibility and responsiveness of our execution of those programs. We have improved response time, driven down the cost of doing business and improved the countries’ insight in to the progress of their cases.

These are significant achievements and I am very proud of the people who worked so hard to meet our customer and stakeholders expectations. While we have come a long way, we are not done and the team is off looking at even more innovative ways to improve our performance. This is incredibly important work, and the U.S. Security Cooperation team is proud to play such an important part in building strong relationships between the U.S. and the rest of the world. n

13

Defense Security Cooperation Agency An Overview

By J.R. Wilson

B

efore there was the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), there was DSAA (Defense Security Assistance Agency), formed in 1971 as a single point of coordination for traditional Security Assistance programs the Defense Department (DoD) executed on behalf of the State Department. Those included Foreign Military Sales (FMS), Foreign Military Financing (FMF), International Military Education and Training (IMET), Excess Defense Articles (EDA), and their precursors, along with related budgetary, legislative, and security matters.

“That’s one reason it was a staff effort in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy. And that’s important throughout the history of DSCA – it is a policy organization,” according to Vanessa Allen Murray, director of DSCA’s Office of Legislative and Public Affairs. “The conversion from DSAA to DSCA occurred on 1 Oct. 1998, mostly in response to a growing mission.

“We had programs that had gone beyond Title 22, which originally was all DSAA was involved with. In the 1990s, we began getting DoD-led Title 10-funded programs – initially the Warsaw Initiative program followed by humanitarian assistance and demining and other programs – so we made the change to be more reflective

14

of what we were doing. We actually were using ‘Security Cooperation’ (SC) before it became a DoD catch-all phrase for all interactions with foreign partners.”

Title 22 of the U.S. Code outlines the role of foreign relations in government; Title 10 provides the legal basis for the roles, missions, and organization of the military. DSCA’s mission with respect to those and other recent authorities granted by Congress is to “lead, resource and educate the Defense Security Cooperation community to shape, refine and execute innovative security solutions for partners in support of U.S. interests.”

In pursuing that mission, DSCA’s strategic plan identifies its core competencies as: • integration of policy and business processes for the sale, lease, grant, or transfer of defense articles and services, to include education and training; • management of complex funding streams and business processes for diverse U.S. and non-U.S. funds and programs; • engagement w it h i nter nat iona l customers and advocacy on their behalf within the U.S. government; • prov i sion of i n for mat ion technology infrastructure for the Security Cooperation community; and • provision of Security Cooperation education and training for U.S. government, industry, and international partners.

“Our job is to pull together the support of many key players. We can’t do this ourselves, but we can enable and support a broad range of U.S. agencies to execute Security Cooperation,” DSCA Director Vice Adm. William E. Landay explained. “Those include State, through which many of our authorities come; OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense] and the Joint Chiefs, who give us broad strategic guidance; in-country teams; U.S. defense industry, a critical partner because they, in most cases, provide the capabilities countries seek to satisfy their security goals.

“The most critical partners are the implementing agencies, the services, and other DoD agencies who work directly with other countries to satisfy specific requirements. We also work very closely with the Under Secretary of DefenseAcquisitions, Technology & Logistics to streamline the processes and be as responsive as we can to support both DoD and the nation’s goals. So we work at the strategic level at building relationships on the acquisitions side. From our perspective, this is really a large, broad team effort.”

For more than four decades, DSCA and its predecessor have seen a constantly expanding portfolio, ref lecting the changing geopolitical environment, new alliances, and even evolv ing

photo courtesy of Royal Australian Air Force

Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18F Super Hornets fly off the coast of Penang, Malaysia, during Exercise Bersama Shield 2011. Royal Australian Air Force Base Amberley’s Super Hornets deployed on their first overseas exercise as they joined air, ground, and naval forces from Malaysia, New Zealand, Singapore, and the United Kingdom for the exercise. The sale of Super Hornets to Australia was one of the more notable recent FMS cases.

technologies. For the past 25 years, that has meant the transfer of numerous Title 10 programs to DSCA, especially since 9/11 – including the Regional Centers for Security Studies, Afghan Security Forces Fund, Coalition Readiness Support, Iraq Security Forces Fund, Pakistan Counterinsurgency Fund, Global Training Equipment, etc.

“Those came to DSCA for execution and program management because we have a unique infrastructure to take care of these efforts in terms of handling the money, working with the services to get items into the contracting process, and getting things into the field,” Murray said.

The end of the Cold War also had some impact on the change from DSAA to DSCA, but the primary driver was the transferring programs, some of which were part of the 1997 Defense Reform Initiative. Government efforts to streamline DoD to save money led to

looking at logical consolidation of some international programs, with DSCA as a primary tool in that effort.

“Things picked up post-9/11,” Murray continued. “That was when we got a lot of programs that still are not actually permanent, such as training and equipping foreign partners to take care of their own defense or partner with us in Iraq and Afghanistan, among other places. So a lot of the Title 10 funds that came to us for execution really were due to what happened in the post-9/11 era, providing us with a wonderful toolbox. When there is an issue that needs to be resolved, we can look at all of these programs and come up with one or several that can work together to achieve a goal.

“For instance, a country may express a desire to send troops to a certain area of the world to fight alongside U.S. troops or perform some mission.

15

Secure communications in mobile applications Communications solutions deployed in peacemaking and peacekeeping missions need to optimally fulfill various requirements. For tactical army communications, Rohde & Schwarz offers the ¸M3TR family of radios for reliable and secure connections under extreme conditions.

Rohde & Schwarz equipment enables the setup of tactical radio networks: ❙ Radio family ranging from manpack, portable radios to vehicle stations ❙ System components such as amplifiers, antenna tuning units and multiband antennas ❙ Interoperable HF/VHF/UHF waveforms in accordance with STANAGs ❙ Maximum data rate in all operating modes ❙ Wide coverage range www.rohde-schwarz.com/ad/armycom

But they may not have much money and need uniforms or equipment or transport or training. We might use FMF to buy some of the basic equipment through FMS. Sometimes equipment can be available through the EDA program, or the country may be elig ible for other funding such as Section 1206 [Global Train and Equip funds]. Country funds could be applied to follow-on support. It is like putting together the pieces of a puzzle, combining different programs holistically to reach a goal with a partner.”

To date, DSCA has been involved with more than 220 nations and international organizations – including post-Soviet Russia – which officials cite as evidence of the global reach and potential global influence of the State and DoD programs it administers. Only a few nations, including Iran, Venezuela, North Korea, Belarus, Cuba, Burma, China, Cyprus, Somalia, and Syria, are currently ineligible for U.S. Security Assistance (SA).

In DoD parlance, Security Assistance is a subset of Security Cooperation, with the latter defined as activities conducted with allies and friendly nations to: • build relationships that promote specified U.S. interests; • build allied and friendly nation capabilities for self-defense and coalition operations; and • provide U.S. forces with peacetime and contingency access.

SA, in turn, comprises those programs through which DoD or commercial contractors provide defense articles and services in support of national policies and objectives.

The broad sweep of SC and SA programs – including humanitarian assistance (HA) and disaster relief (DR) in areas where DoD may not have a presence – reflects both the changing nature of international relationships and U.S. global priorities, such as the ongoing shift of focus from Southwest Asia to Pacific Asia.

“The intent of Security Cooperation is to work those relationships in all areas of the world, so if the U.S. puts an extra priority on any one region, the programs and processes already are there,” Landay added. “So ‘rebalancing’ is not really required.”

A primary DSCA goal is Building Partner Capacity (BPC) through the

provision of equipment, training, and exercises. That, too, has evolved since 9/11, with DSCA receiving new authorities to pursue efforts not previously available, including greater flexibility and responsiveness in addressing the needs of individual nations.

“I think that will continue as we go forward, seeing areas where we need to develop programs in place to address those or seeking new authorities,” Landay predicted. “So the BPC business is growing, becoming more sophisticated and mature, and we are seeing capabilities within the programs keeping up with that.

“With the exception of NATO, our relationships are bilateral, so as new multilateral and multinational relations develop, we are working to ensure we can deal with those, as well. If you have countries with specific capabilities, you can partner with them, but it also will require us, within our security cooperation efforts, to adapt to address those kinds of issues.”

Working closely with U.S. joint combatant commands (COCOMs), primarily geographic (GCCs – i.e., AFRICOM), but also a growing relationship with the functional COCOMs (such as USSOCOM, U.S. Special Operations Command), is seen as vital to a coordinated foreign policy and national security and global military goals.

“Each COCOM, every month, provides me their top 10 to 15 Security Cooperation cases they would like us to put special emphasis on because of their high concern. We bring together the Security Cooperation staffs – mine and the individual services’ – to find what we can do to meet their requirements,” Landay said.

“So we look for a tight linkage between the COCOMs and the programs we are working. Our goal is to make sure we best utilize those programs and capabilities to meet the requirements of COCOMs and ambassadors in each nation, focusing on the best use of each resource and that it agrees with the strategies and goals of others.”

The major programs administered by DSCA – FMS, FMF, IMET, EDA, End Use Monitoring (EUM), and Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief and Mine Action (HDM) – often function in various combinations to meet the needs of other nations while also furthering U.S. goals

around the world. That is accomplished by the close coordination of DSCA program directors; the COCOMs; ambassadors; embassy-based Security Cooperation Offices (SCO); the military services and departments; the offices of the secretaries of Defense, State, and Commerce; Congress; the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS); the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID); allies; and host nations.

The fastest way for a nation to lose SC support from the United States – with the notable exception of HDM – is to be found guilty of human rights (HR) violations.

According to DSCA’s “Security Assistance Management Manual” (SAMM), the SCOs, COCOMs, embassies, and DSCA personnel in-country must ensure each partner nation’s government, military, and even individuals and units nominated for U.S.funded training or support first are fully vetted for HR violations.

Each major DSCA program is covered in greater detail in individual chapters of this publication, but it is important to understand how they interrelate and, in some cases, comprise the primary face of the United States and the DoD in a given nation.

International Military Education and Training “IMET funding, provided through the International Affairs account, targets special military education programs. From our perspective, at a strategic level with State, we look at where and how we want to engage current and future military leaders of partner nations,” BPC Division Programs Deputy James McGaughey said.

Those selected, based on background and need, have available to them formal instruction in more than 2,000 courses taught at some 150 U.S. military schools and installations. In 2012, thousands of students from more than 115 nations attended classes alongside students from other nations and from every U.S. military service.

Candidate selection includes how that individual, as his or her career unfolds, may help support coalition building for international operations. But in addition to military doctrine, IMET also emphasizes a U.S. cultural perspective, so alumni will return home with a better picture not only of how the United States does what it does, but why and how it is

17

18

Instructors from the U.S. Army Security Assistance Training Management Organization (USASATMO) help Namibian soldiers with the proper low crawl technique during the Small Unit Tactics portion of the Warrior Leader Instructor Training Course. USASATMO’s Engagement Branch Mobile Training Team conducted a Warrior Leader Instructor Course as part of establishing a Namibian noncommissioned officer training course.

of the process ahead of the training start date,” the SAMM states. “In some cases, it may be prudent for the SCO to initiate HR vetting of both a primary and alternate candidate or otherwise initiate the vetting process far enough in advance to allow adequate time to complete HR vetting of a substitute student in the event the primary nominee fails the vetting process.”

It does not end there, however.

Besides the U.S. Embassy human rights

officer, IMET candidates are screened by the regional security officer, Drug Enforcement Agency, and consular section, among others, for evidence of drug trafficking, corruption, criminal conduct, or other activities inconsistent with U.S. policy goals. Those reports are included with other documents related to that individual and maintained in SCO records for 10 years.

Foreign Military Sales/ Foreign Military Financing As authorized by the Arms Export Cont rol Act (A EC A), F MS i s t he mechanism through which the United States may sell military equipment and services to foreign nations and international organizations “when the president formally finds that to do so will strengthen the security of the U.S. and promote world peace.” In essence, it is the interface between a foreign buyer and the DoD procurement system.

U.S. Army photo

engaged in the strategic arena. Equally important is a greater understanding of the makeup of American soldier/civilian interaction and the importance of the relationship between the military and civilian government.

“When we look at the IMET program and specific authorities, there are multiple stakeholders – not only the partner nations, but the COCOMs, State Department and ambassadors, OSD staff, military department staffs,” McGaughey said. “We also use these programs to build alumni and follow them through their careers as persons of prominence; when they assume leadership roles, the people they met here probably are assuming leadership roles in our military. The goal is to leverage those relationships as the years go by.”

It is with IMET that HR issues go beyond the national level and down to the individual student candidate.

“SCOs must ensure vetting is initiated early enough to ensure completion

“We also use these programs to build alumni and follow them through their careers as persons of prominence; when they assume leadership roles, the people they met here probably are assuming leadership roles in our military. The goal is to leverage those relationships as the years go by.”

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. Oshawn Jefferson

In addition to providing equipment a partner nation needs to secure its own borders and work with the U.S. military in coalition contingency operations, FMS provides additional markets for U.S. industry and, through economies of scale, also may reduce acquisition costs on some items bought by the U.S. military. Historically, about 80 percent of FMS purchases are made using the

partner nation’s own money, thus also helping America’s balance of trade.

FMF is a State Department grant and loan program that enables those nations without sufficient funds of their own to pay for U.S. military articles, services, and training. All FMF monies come back to the United States and U.S. industry.

“FMF is a crucial part of the FMS process,” said Ann Cataldo, principal

director of DSCA’s Business Operations Directorate. “I talk to our customers every day and there is a strong comment that they trust the U.S. and want to buy from us. So keeping our friends and allies as our business partners – and so strategic partners – is where my heart is.”

Scott Schless, principal director of the Strategy Directorate, said a key element to both FMS and FMF is predicting how much funding will be required two years out as part of the congressional budget process.

“We do the budget, anticipating spending plans for the upcoming fiscal year and the following year,” he said. “So right now we’re preparing the budgets for FY 13 and FY 14. But in the interim, we work closely with State to produce some of the documents they send up to Congress every year, generating a lot of the issue papers for that package.”

The FMS/FMF process has changed significantly since 9/11, he added, in large part due to Building Partner Capacity through arms transfers becoming a core DoD mission at the national security policy level. Increased funding – and significantly increased sales – also have expanded FMS “by an order of magnitude” from levels seen in the 1990s.

Rapid geopolitical changes – from revolutions in Egypt, Libya, and Syria, to Iraqi and Afghan efforts to build new democracies following the ouster of harsh dictatorships, to continuing shifting of alliances in a multi-polar world – require DSCA to work continuously with State and its other partners to update FMS/FMF needs and status on a nation-by-nation basis.

Members of the Afghan National Army go through a field training exercise during the Demining Predeployment Course at Bagram Airfield on April 12, 2007.

19

Mission Critical Reliability in a Voice Communication Switching System

“We usually have a plan in mind for how to use FMF appropriations, but things change from the time we work on that plan and the year the money is actually allocated,” Schless noted. “So there is flexibility allowing us to notify Congress of changes in needs; but there is nothing automatic about it.”

Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief and Mine Action “In terms of personnel and maybe even funding, we’re one of the smallest DSCA components, but certainly are high impact,” HDM Management and Program Analyst Ramon Davis said.

“Our projects have to meet a humanitarian need. It’s a non-traditional tool – although now a priority mission for DoD – and is becoming more popular.

You don’t normally think about DoD supporting another country’s ministry of health or education, but that’s a part of what we do.

“Many people are still getting used to the idea that DoD can work with our partners and other agencies in executing these kinds of projects, but one of the major benefits we bring is tying civil and military capabilities together on disaster management. In a lot of countries, the military is not really tied into national response, so they were missing a lot of key resources.

By bringing those players to the table, they became more aware of the capabilities actually in those countries.”

With Humanitarian Assistance, a major emphasis is on support for education and local medical care, from building or updating schools and clinics to helping train teachers. A growing component is disaster planning and preparedness, which sometimes is combined with other needs, such as the construction of major storm shelters that double as schools.

Disaster Relief – whether in response to natural or man-made events – primarily involves providing resources and transport of goods and people in cooperation with other elements of DoD, the State Department, and U.S. and international agencies.

Mine Action centers around training other nations’ personnel in the detection and safe removal of mines and other ordnance left over from both

recent and decades-old conflicts. The goal is to help the 60 or so nations known to have such problems reclaim land for farming and development and reduce the danger to their populations, especially children. A recent addition to this area has been teaching nations how to deal with old stockpiled munitions, sometimes in bunkers that were simply buried with still-active munitions piled into them.

HDM funding in recent years has nearly doubled – to about $108 million in FY 12 – with most of that distributed among the COCOMs based on historical need and the capability to execute humanitarian programs.

Excess Defense Articles Each military service declares equipment or supplies to be excess based on the approved force acquisition objective or force retention stock. Once listed as EDA, other state and federal agencies can ask for it; if none do, it is reviewed for transfer to foreign customers – all FMS- and FMF-eligible nations – at which point DSCA becomes involved.

EDA ranges from uniforms to ships and aircraft, some in the United States, others overseas. All are sold (usually at 5 to 50 percent of original acquisition value) on an “as is/where is” basis, with the recipient responsible for all transport, refurbishment, etc. A major DSCA task with EDA is to confer with the Department of Commerce to ensure such transfers do not interfere with the efforts of U.S. companies to sell new items.

“EDA is an important part of the whole Security Assistance process,” FMS specialist June Squire said. “It recently has become even more important, from our perspective, because we see an increase in the number of requests coming in. It is easy to interpret that related to what is happening to economies around the world and how that is influencing the way countries view EDA.” End Use Monitoring Whether EDA or new acquisitions through FMS, the president is required by law to ensure all military equipment and systems transferred to another nation are used by the original recipient for the purposes stated in their request. In 2001,

DoD implemented an End Use Monitoring EUM program called Golden Sentry as part of DSCA’s security cooperation portfolio.

“Golden Sentry reviews and ensures all equipment exported under the prog ram goes on ly to authorized recipients for legitimate use,” Program Manager Chuck Handal explained. “A second task is to perform post-delivery EUM to assure the equipment is used for the intended purpose and is properly secured and not transferred to a third party without U.S. authorization.

“DSC A i s t he execut ive agency manag ing FMS for DoD for State, but DSCA’s EUM program is strictly related to DoD-managed governmentto-government exports, 99 percent of which are part of the FMS process.

DSCA assigns one person to oversee monitoring operations in each nation; where those involve different U.S. military services, each will provide monitoring officers to cover that equipment.”

Conclusion Perhaps the biggest lesson learned since 9/11 has been the need for increased flexibility and responsiveness in a world where requirements and even alliances can shift overnight. To help meet those needs, DSCA established three new groups: Expeditionary Requirements Generation Teams (ERGTs), Security Assistance Survey Teams (SASTs), the Strategic Planning Support Group (SPSG), and the Compressed, Rapid Acquisition, Fielding and Training (CRAFT) initiative.

The agency also received congressional authorization to restart the Special Defense Acquisition Fund (SDAF).

In a July 31, 2012 memorandum to more than a dozen senior DoD and service officials involved in the SC process, Landay noted CRAFT, recommended by the Security Cooperation Reform Task Force (SCRTF), had been approved by the Secretary of Defense to help “fast track” urgent requirements SDAF and even an improved FMS process could not address in the time required. In concert with those two, CRAFT completes a three-pronged approach to accelerate the delivery of defense articles and services to build partner-nation capabilities.

“CRAFT was identif ied as a key initiative to ensure the rapid delivery of defense articles and services to allies

21

22

to complement the CRAFT process and should accelerate normal procedures and reduce the need to pursue more exceptional processes such as CRAFT.” W it h t he SDA F, DSC A ca n put orders for equipment they know to be in demand into the DoD acquisitions process before actually receiving a formal request. Because that process can be lengthy, already having the items in production or in a warehouse significantly decreases the response time once a request is made.

ERGTs and SPSG help DSCA and others involved in various U.S. Security Cooperation and Security Assistance programs not only identify the most urgent needs of specific nations, but also how to expedite the approval and delivery process. As such, they both complement CRAFT and reduce the need to fully implement that process.

Various types of equipment and ammunition, including this Heavy Equipment Transporter, were delivered to Morocco on June 30, 2011, at the Casablanca Port as a result of two Excess Defense Articles Foreign Military Sales cases originating from U.S. Army Security Assistance Command.

DSCA created the SPSG to identify technology security issues early in the FMS process – potentially before a country submits a request. Once issues are identified, the SPSG notifies the Technology Security and Foreign Disclosure Office (TSFDO) to ensure issues receive expeditious handling by the Arms Transfer and Technology Release Senior Steering Group (ATTR SSG).

According to the official DoD guidance document, SPSG “will consult

U.S. Army photo

and partners,” he wrote. “A systematic approach to anticipating partner nation requirements is the fundamental concept underpinning the CRAFT initiative … It is impossible, however, to forecast all partner capability requirements and unexpected, urgent requirements which will still arise – usually as a result of unplanned events or a fluid operational environment. Such requirements may demand an expeditious response on timelines that even significantly improved processes and procedures will be unable to meet. These requirements will require special measures.

“CRAFT is intended to be used only in extraordinary circumstances, when conventional processes cannot deliver on time and delayed delivery is likely to cause a significant operational or strategic risk.

The other recommendations identified within the SCRTF Report … are intended

U.S. Army photo by Pvt. 1st Class Daneille Hendrix

Iraqi forces display U.S.-made Abrams tanks during the Iraqi Army Day celebration in the International Zone, Iraq, Jan. 6, 2011. Iraqi Army Day was celebrated by Iraqi forces parading around the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

with the TSFDO and, if necessary, present urgent/emergent COCOM FMS capability requirements to the ATTR SSG for expedited technology security/ foreign disclosure processing in support of CRAFT requests.” In that role, SPSG is a major participant in the capability requirements process.

By sending ERGTs in country to work with SCOs, COCOMs, the U.S. embassy, and that nation’s government and military officials, DSCA not only gains greater insight into local needs and requests, but also what alternatives may be less costly and more quickly delivered. The key, according to Landay, is helping partner nations understand the trade-offs that may get them the capability they need in the least time, then helping shape their formal requests.

“This is the first year we’ve done this, but we think it will really help us get ahead of the process. It is part of our overall theme to be more anticipatory than in the past,” Landay said. “We have good knowledge, especially from our teams in country, of what each nation needs. So now we are looking at how to get ahead of potential requests without too much risk for the U.S.” While ERGTs may be formed to meet a wide spectrum of COCOM and SCO needs, the primary focus is on assisting SCOs with defining partner-nation requirements and developing solutions and options.

As Landay explained in his memo to senior government and DoD officials, “Successfully developing partner nation capabilities involves defining requirements and then planning, assembling and synchronizing a wide spectrum of cooperation programs and activities.

Security cooperation planning must also take into account such factors as alternative sourcing solutions, technology security and foreign disclosure, production schedules, availability of forces and funding and long-term sustainment.

“The increased planning and coordination of responsibilities that accompany

capability-building efforts – or a lack of experience with the equipment and training being delivered – can make it difficult for SCOs to adequately address requirements. This can result in delayed or inadequately developed partner

The key, according to Landay, is helping partner nations understand the trade-offs that may get them the capability they need in the least time, then helping shape their formal requests.

nation capabilities and the neglect of long-term sustainment issues.”

A s DSC A moves toward a postOperat ion Endu r i ng Freedom / Operation Iraqi Freedom world, the processes a nd i mplementat ion of FMS, FMF, HDM, IMET, EDA, EUM, and related programs, enhanced by CRAFT, ERGT, SPSG, and other new tools and programs arising from post9/11 lessons learned, are expected to increase its status as a primary agent of U.S. foreign policy and the related goals of enhanced national security and global military presence.

“All those efforts, along with things we are doing in Security Cooperation reform, are just starting to pay significant dividends to the U.S. and our international partners,” Landay concluded. “People tend to have a view of how the process works as it did five years ago, but today it works significantly better than it did then. In another five years, it will work significantly better than it does today.

“These are not programs with an end to themselves, but critical tools in supporting U.S. goals and objectives. So this is not just things we talk about, but actions we have taken to make everything even faster and more responsive as we move forward.” n

23

Air Force Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate

W

ith the foundational mission of delivering materiel solutions for i nt er nat iona l partners in support of the Air Force Global Partnership Strategy, the professional workforce at the Air Force Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate (AFSAC) manages, integrates, and leads the Air Force Materiel Command (AFMC) Foreign Military Sales (FMS) Enterprise.

As such, AFSAC fills multiple roles, ranging from developing and executing cases to policy, foreign disclosure, budgeting, and financial execution.

The AFMC FMS Enterprise currently encompasses cases with more than 100 countries; with total portfolio value in excess of $120 billion; covering systems in various life phases and technologies ranging from the 1940s to the most recently fielded systems.

The former A FSAC commander, Brig. Gen. Arnold W. Bunch Jr., characterized the organization as both “a team” and “a family” consisting of just over 450 government civilians, military, contractors, and foreign liaison officers. Bunch is now commander of Air Force Test Center.

“The A ir Force Secu rity Assistance [and Cooperatio Directorate’s] mission is to advance national security by building global partnerships one case at a time,” Bunch offered. “We realize here at AFSAC that each and every interaction we have on a case is an opportunity to build or improve relationships and that each of those partnerships plays

24

a critical role in the national security of not only the United States but also the national security of our global partners.”

Describing a wide range of organizational successes over the past few years, he highlighted a few of the recent achievements that give the organization a special sense of pride.

“We are really proud of the fact that we have enabled our partners to provide timely support to humanitarian relief efforts around the world,” he said.

“For example, with our support, our partners were able to rapidly provide help to those in need following the [January 2010] earthquake in Haiti.

In one specific case, we prioritized parts support and overall support for Brazil’s C-130 fleet. They did the work,

but we enabled it by providing the parts, support, and priorities. The result was Brazil’s delivery of over 200 tons of food, relief supplies, and construction equipment in support of that mission.

We see that as a valuable tie.”

A nother example of faci l itating hu ma n ita r ia n ef for t s took place following the massive earthquake in Chile February 2010.

“Shortly before that earthquake hit, we had provided Chile with three KC-135s that they had brought into their inventory,” he recalled. “We increased our levels of support and ensured that they were able to keep those aircraft flying in the aftermath of that quake.

As a result, they were able to transport necessary relief supplies within their own country to provide humanitarian assistance for themselves.

“Another thing that we are really proud of – and I think it’s a big achievement – is the work we did during Operation Unified Protector,” he said. While declining to cite specific details of AFSAC support to the 2011 international operations over Libya, he acknowledged “multiple examples where we received requisitions and requests that normally require as much as 120 days to fill – but that we were actually filling in four days or less.

And that took the efforts of the

The first Chilean KC-135 “E” model arrives in Santiago in February 2010. Crews from Sheppard Air Force Base, Texas, and the Utah Air National Guard helped deliver the first of three U.S. KC-135E aircraft acquired by the Chilean air force. Members of the 151st Air Refueling Wing deployed to Chile to help provide operations and maintenance training to the Chilean air force on the aircraft, but the training quickly transformed into a real-world humanitarian operation after an 8.8-magnitude earthquake hit the country.

Aircrews transported critical medical equipment and supplies throughout the country.

U.S. Air Force photo by Lt. Col. Boyd Badali

By scott r. gourley

Department of National Defense Canada photo by Cpl. Darcy Lefebvre

security cooperation team, AFSAC, the Air Force Materiel Command product and logistic center, SAF/IA [Air Force International Affairs], DSCA [Defense Security Cooperation Agency], and the contractor teams to ensure that the operations being executed continued unimpeded. In other words, operations did not have to slow down because of the support that we were providing to our foreign partners. And I am extremely proud of the professionalism and the dedication that the entire team exhibited during that critical time.”

In addition to the humanitarian missions and combat operations, Bunch stressed some recent successes involving AFSAC’s most valuable resource: its people.

“Besides executing all of the cases, delivering hardware or logistics support, we have also garnered awards for our efforts in the area of workforce development,” he said. “One of our initiatives, for example, involves creating Process Desk Guides, where we have documented our processes to allow standardization. Our Supervisor Certification Processes have also been recognized at the OSD [Office of the Secretary of Defense] level as ‘Best Practices.’ Understandably we are really proud of that as well.”

Asked about current activities that help to highlight AFSAC’s roles and missions, Bunch said, “One of the most important activities that we focus on is the manner in which we address Foreign Military Sales. By that I mean that we take a total systems approach. When our international partners request information, we don’t just focus on a platform or the specific hardware that they might be requesting. By focusing instead on the total system, our goal is to work with the partner to ensure that they have the capability that they need – not just a static display aircraft.”

He continued, “For example, if a partner were to submit a Letter of Req uest expressi ng i nterest i n a mobility aircraft, our focus would go beyond that aircraft. We would dialogue with our partners to make sure that they considered things like the kinds of logistics support needed; how they will support their tech orders; the kind of spares package they will need; whether they have the right support equipment to maintain and keep the aircraft flying; new airfield infrastructure; how their maintainers and aircrews will receive needed training; and many other items addressing our overall goal of making

A Royal Canadian Air Force CC-130J Hercules performing fly bys, landings, and take offs during Exercise Mountain Star. The use of common equipment and aircraft like the C-130 among partners aids in interoperability, and the importance of Foreign Military Sales will only grow in importance as domestic Department of Defense budgets decrease.

sure they have the capability to meet their national objectives.”

Bunch noted that ongoing activities also include a continuing focus on process standardization.

“It makes the processes more repeatable, reliable, and timely,” he noted. “In addition, another added benefit is that it allows us to assimilate and integrate new employees into our AFSAC team in a more timely fashion. And we believe that in the future that will take on even more importance.”

One of the specific systems in place to provide enhanced customer support is the Worldwide Warehouse Redistribution Services (WWRS) program.

“It’s another means for us to support our international partners through a w i n-w i n system t hat we have

25

established,” Bunch explained. “The program was started in 1998 as a test and it went permanent in 2001. The WWRS system facilitates the sale of excess inventory between our international partners. We do that to meet all of our legal requirements and to ensure the anonymity of the participants.

“How it works is if a country has excess inventory they would like to offer for sale to other partners, they can list it for sale on the WWRS website,” he said. “That allows one country to get money by selling their excess inventory. They can then reinvest that money in upgrades or sustainment of their other systems. And the country procuring the inventory can meet

26

requirements for things that may be hard to find or not in the U.S. inventory; for example, F-4 parts.”

Another AFSAC system is the Parts and Repair Ordering System (PROS).

“This is a tri-service program that was established as a vehicle for our partners to get enhanced support for non-standard or hard-to-get items,” he said. “And over the last five years, we have generated over 110,000 requisitions through the system with a supply discrepancy rate of less than 1 percent over the life of the contract.”

Highlighting PROS applicability to something like F-4 or F-5 spare parts or repairs, he stated, “Today those items are not usually in U.S. inventories or repaired by United States Air Force personnel – in some cases not even by the original contractors. But PROS provides a procurement mechanism for our partners to get the parts or repairs for those items. They can come to us through this methodology that also helps to get contractors online to support systems that we no longer support.”

AFSAC is also moving forward on an initiative dubbed the Letter of Request automation tool.

“The Letter of Request is the first official step in the process for a partner to request products or services from the United States government,” Bunch said. “And that request captures or outlines what the country’s requirements are.

“Today that process is predominantly a serial process, where it comes to us; we send it to the next person; and it keeps going on in sequence to the next people down the line. It’s touched by many people who play a role in the process and it has to f low through all of those organizations. And many times there are questions and multiple back-and-forth transactions along the way. As a result of all that, many of our international partners have voiced concern that they don’t have the desired insight of where their Letter of Request stands in the process. But this new tool provides an electronic means to capture that partner’s request. The country will complete the request electronically.

U.S. Air Force photo by Senior Airman Tyler Placie

U.S. and Iraqi airmen fly in formation during one of the last training flights for the 52nd Expeditionary Flight Training Squadron (EFTS) and Squadron 203 Sept. 3, 2011, over Iraq. Advisers from the 52nd EFTS turned over flight training operations to the Iraqi air force Squadron 203 Sept. 5, 2011.

And then, based on the products or services requested, it is sent to all of the responsible organizations at the same time – removing the serial part and sending it out in parallel. By getting the internal question and answer completed up front, our belief is that we are going to better define the requirements and do that in a more timely fashion,” he said.

Additionally, the requesting partner will be able to use the AFSAC online tool to monitor the status of their request in the system.

“We really believe that this is going to be a better way to nail down requirements up front. On Air Force acquisition programs – and I’m sure this also cuts across all of DoD – one of the keys to program success is nailing the requirements up front. And we believe that by doing this we are going to set our partners up and set ourselves up so that we do a better job of case development, case execution, and eventually case closure.”

AFSAC has presented the initiative at DSCA forums and to both the Army and the Navy in the belief that there is applicability for the tool to be adapted to meet sister service needs as well.

Returning to the critical AFSAC view of the importance of human capital, Bunch observed, “More than any of the jobs that I have ever had, Foreign Military Sales and what we do in AFSAC is more relationship-based than anything. And as such our most valuable resource in executing this mission is our people. So we have got to keep our focus on continuing their education and the development to prepare our people as they operate in that environment.”

He acknowledged that initiatives like the Letter of Request automation tool noted above represent change and, as such, also present one of the challenges that AFSAC will face over the next few years.

“It’s a change but it’s also a challenge,” he observed. “You are changing the way you have historically done business.

And some places or some countries have established processes that they might not want to adapt. But we’ve got to show them the success here so that we can get them to migrate over to this system that we believe will show them significant benefits in the future.”

Foreign Military Sales will only grow in importance in relation to declining U.S. defense budgets.

“As our Department of Defense budgets decrease, our partners’ capabilities will become, I believe, even more important.

And if we do not build those relationships with our partners so that our forces are interoperable, providing timely humanitarian support or applying force to protect peace around the world is going to be even more challenging.“ “A s ou r Department of Defense budgets decrease, our partners’ capabilities will become, I believe, even more important. And if we do not build those relationships with our partners so that our forces are interoperable, providing timely humanitarian support or applying force to protect peace around the world is going to be even more challenging.

And with what I see as the increased importance of Foreign Military Sales, I also think there is going to be an accompanying demand for improved execution. So one of our challenges will be in continuing to process improve and get better,” he said.

“Our vision here at AFSAC is ‘A Transformational Force for Security Cooperation,’” he continued. “It’s built on that need to continue improving.

A nd my intent – the commander’s intent – is to look across the entire FMS Enterprise for ways to transform our processes so that they are efficient, consistent, and accurate.”

One final challenge offered by Bunch is the historical and continuing challenge of communication.

“Pulling together an effective Foreign Military Sales case involves the international partner, multiple agencies in the United States Air Force, multiple agencies in the Department of Defense, multiple agencies around the United States government, and many industry partners. And continuing to improve the consistent, frequent communication across those multiple organizations, each with their own cultural boundaries and barriers, is going to be key to our success in the future,” he said.

“Our key message to U.S. warfighters is that we are really here to build

capable international partners to serve alongside them,” he said. “In doing so, we are working with sovereign nations.

And they are doing things to meet their national security objectives. Those national security objectives also support our own national security objectives.

We are doing our part to meet our commitments with our partners and to remain trusted partners ourselves.

That’s critical. And being interoperable is also critical. So we are doing our part to ensure that those partners that work beside U.S. warfighters or U.S. humanitarian supporters in the future will be interoperable and capable.”

For industry supporters, he added, “We’re all one team from the United States perspective. We have to work together to keep a consistent message for international partners. Because it doesn’t matter who might be at fault if we don’t meet our commitments. The partner is going to view it as the United States. So we have to continue to team and partner to meet our commitments and expand the benefits to everyone from our Foreign Military Sales business.

“To our partner nations, my key message is that we are committed to working with them to provide them with capabilities at whatever level they need,” Bunch concluded. “Our partners have different requirements and we appreciate and understand those differences. What may work to meet the national security needs of a partner in Latin America may not work for one of our partners in Europe. So we will listen to their requirements and help build the case to best address their national objectives from a total systems approach.” n

27

Navy International Programs Office By scott r. gourley

W

hen published in October 2007, “A Cooperative Strategy for 21st Century Seapower” represented a historical “first,” with the maritime forces of the United States – the Navy, Marine Corps, and Coast Guard – coming together to create a unified maritime strategy. That unified strategy stressed the integration of sea power with other elements of national power, as well as elements from our allies and international partners around the world.

“There’s a line in that strategy that we appreciate,” observed Rear Adm. Joseph W. Rixey, director, Navy International Prog rams Of f ice (NIPO). “It says, ‘Although our forces can surge when necessary to respond to crisis, trust and cooperation cannot be surged.’”

Outl i n i ng how that th i n k i ng is reflected in his organization’s mission and activities, Rixey explained, “We play a key role in shaping the Navy Department’s approach to things like global partnerships, achieving goals of maritime strategy, shaping interoperability, acquisition strategy, global maritime domain awareness, and support for data sharing. All of those things are absolutely necessary for global operations – especially with the realities of the 21st century. When you look at where budgets are going, and when you recognize our need to expand maritime partnerships as we shift ourselves, this is critically important.”

That recog nition is ref lected in the formal NIPO mission statement: “To promote, enable and sustain an expanding set of global maritime partnerships and deliver timely military capability through security and armaments cooperation programs

28

that support U.S. security strategy and protect critical technologies.”

Rixey highlighted two key elements of the organization’s mission statement: “We build and maintain partnerships; and at the same time, we also protect critical technologies.”

“Sometimes those two elements might be seen as at odds with each other,” he acknowledged. “But it is critically important that while we are enabling our maritime partners that we will always ensure that we won’t do anything to harm ourselves. And that’s the nature of protecting critical technologies.”

As the Department of the Navy’s focal point for technology security, NIPO is involved with a range of issues surrounding disclosure policy and oversight. Specific areas of involvement include things like export licensing for companies wanting to sell abroad, cooperative arrangements with other countries, and information and personnel exchange.

The organization’s security cooperation role also covers Foreign Military Sales (FMS). In terms of raw numbers, NIPO currently manages about $6 billion in annual FMS, with a total active case value of $75 billion. Organization maritime programs include not only Navy platforms but Marine Corps and Coast Guard platforms as well.

“That’s what most people are familiar with,” Rixey said. “We transfer military articles and services through sale or grant to our partners, with the United States government serving as the execution agent. We also can lease military articles or do a transfer of excess defense articles. An example of the latter could be Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates, which we might turn over to foreign countries, for a price, after U.S.

decommissioning. We will train their crews prior to that ‘decom’ and then they will take that ship.”

“We don’t do that without the appropriate congressional notifications or legislation if required for a significant article,” Rixey cautioned. He added that there is potential for the process to include naval aircraft excess defense articles like the KC-130R, UH-3H, and P-3C. Asserting that the financial situation of a particular partner nation normally affects the strategy that country will pursue, Rixey offered, “While some countries tend to want to do things like cooperative development or buying new through Foreign Military Sales, other countries prefer a used product in order to upgrade their current equipment.”

Other NIPO activities involve “grant programs,” where money is provided to select countries that use it to procure articles and services, and “Section 1206 Funds.” Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for fiscal year 2006 provides the Secretary of Defense with authority to train and equip foreign military and foreign maritime security forces. Funds may be obligated only with the concurrence of the Secretary of State. Section 1206 provides the Secretary of Defense with authority to train and equip foreign military forces for two purposes: 1) Enable foreign military forces, as well as foreign maritime forces, to perform counterterrorism (CT) operations; and 2) Enable foreign military forces to participate in or to support military and stability operations in which U.S. armed forces are participating.

“One more thing we do that has quite a profound impact is international training,” Rixey added. “This is

U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communications Specialist 1st Class James C. Davis

a ‘low dollar’ investment but yields very powerful results.”

Expanding on the command’s training and education efforts, the director offered, “We bring about 500 officers and enlisted personnel from around the world into the country to go through some elite schools. Those schools include the Naval Postgraduate School, Naval War College, and even the United States Naval Academy, where we have 50 to 60 midshipmen from 47 different countries admitted for four years. Those midshipmen learn about our way of life and our perspective. Those young people who come here are of high caliber and will likely return home and play important roles in their own countries. And they bring that learned perspective from the United States back with them.”

The importance of training is a two-way street, which is reflected in the immersion of some U.S. students in critical language and cultural training in preparation for future assignments like foreign affairs officer.

“I have a number of foreign affairs officers on my staff,” Rixey noted. “They have language skills or they have worked in embassies or defense cooperation offices in particular countries. All of

this training back and forth is what I call ‘perspective training.’ It comes in addition to ‘warfighter training’ and it is a very, very powerful program.”

NIPO also serves as a facilitator among policy decision-makers and between industry, regional combatant commanders, and partner countries.

“That means a lot of dialogue,” Rixey said. “We reach out to our regional combatant commanders and their staffs who are on the pointed end of the spear, working with their partner countries to see what capability gaps need to be filled. And we talk to partners in those countries themselves – who will also tell us about any gaps that need to be filled.”

“We don’t own the programs outright,” Rixey clarified, “but we work with the systems commands – like NAVSEA, NAVAIR, SPAWAR and M ARCORPS PEOs and PMAs – to identify those gapfilling programs and then put the policy, licensing, and all the disclosure in place to execute. It is the materiel commands that actually do the execution of the contracts. What we do is match needs to capabilities; we work with the program offices to put contracts in place; and we make sure that issues of technology security are addressed.”

The Turkish frigate TCG Gelibolu (F 493) transits the Mediterranean Sea during Phoenix Express (PE 08), an annual exercise to increase interoperability of participating nations. Foreign Military Sales and transfers of Oliver Hazard Perry-class frigates have contributed to the stability and security of partner nations worldwide.

“We get the resources to conduct Foreign Military Sales from DSCA [Defense Security Cooperation Agency],” he added. “DSCA provides what are called Foreign Military Sales Administrative Funds for the Department of the Navy to hire the people to do that work.”

Across the mission areas noted above, NIPO currently has more than 5,000 programs with 173 different countries, a broad spectrum of responsibility that is managed by a staff of only 223 people divided among four different directorates: IPO-01 through IPO-04.

IPO-01 is the Technology, Security and Cooperative Programs Directorate, wh ich is tasked w ith th i ngs l i ke disclosure policy, export licensing, and even has involvement in discussions surrounding the purchase of U.S. companies by foreign investors.

29

“ We a l s o e s t a b l i s h c o o p e r a tive prog rams out of ‘-01,’” Rixey commented. “An example would be the P-8 program that we carry out with Australia, the Joint Strike Fighter, or Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile [ESSM].

Those cooperative programs are when a country wants to come in and develop something with us. They don’t want to wait to obtain it after we’ve built it.”

NIPO’s IPO-02 Directorate manages the FMS Security Cooperation functions funded by DSCA. “That directorate is broken down into regions, like you would see with the combatant commands,” Ri xey explained. “So I have captains and GS-15s managing regions, with lieutena nt com ma nders, l ieutena nts, and GS-14s managing countries. For example, I have a country program director assigned to Korea. In my case, I have an 0-5 [commander] who speaks the language and is a foreign affairs officer. Having him, with that skill set, performing the jobs that we do, facilitates the overall effort.”

IPO-03 is the Strategic Planning Directorate.

30

“It’s small, but the folks that I have working in that directorate often come out of the ‘-01 and -02 factory,’ as I call it,” Rixey said. “And with that experience, they help streamline our processes and procedures. More importantly, they work to anticipate, to the best of their ability, those things that may be coming our way. That anticipation allows us to start working the process early and speeds up the delivery of the product.”

“IPO-03 looks at strategic guidance and country priorities with the COCOMs [combatant commands],” he added. “And they distill that down into a priority set for me to prioritize the work that we do.

With 223 people implementing 5,000 programs in 173 countries, there has to be a priority scheme. Some things you have to do quickly. Other things you can put on the back burner. And we want to make sure that we know as much as possible to make those prioritization decisions.”

“We also look at things like, ‘If we work on this particular project with this particular country, what is the return on engagement and what is the return on the investment?’ When I talk about the return on engagement, I mean that even though some country project might have low dollar value, it could be very significant for us to have a regional presence. Conversely, a country that procures an F/A-18 Hornet or a P-8 has a very high return on investment by driving our own unit costs down. If we provide Hornets, we can help reduce our own costs. That’s a high return on investment.

We’ve also had other product lines – the Harpoon in particular – where we kept

U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Eric Dietrich

U.S. Naval War College students walk toward the graduation tent before the June 2012 graduation ceremony.

Five hundred thirty-five students graduated during the ceremony, a number of them from friendly nations.

International training and education yield positive results far out of proportion to the small investment.

the product line open despite no U.S. procurements. When the U.S. did go back to the Harpoon line, they did not incur the start-up costs of that line. That’s another very high return on investment.

So you can expect that if something is a high return on engagement and a high return on investment that we will be focused on it here at NIPO.” IPO-03 also performs functions like outreach to industry and public affairs.

“Our industry outreach is critical right now,” Rixey observed. “They see domestic sales coming down and they want to go international. And we want to make sure that we are ready to respond appropriately and quickly. After all, it’s also very important to us to keep jobs, keep production lines open, and maintain the industrial base that is critical for warfighter capability.”

IPO-04 performs the budgeting, financial monitoring, and training that keeps the organization running smoothly.

Acknowledging that one common customer complaint involves the slowness of many of the underlying processes, Rixey highlighted the organization’s role in Security Cooperation reform and other reform activities designed to speed results across the board.

“The president put out a directive that we need to reform export control,” he explained. “Obviously the Department of Defense is prepared for action. But this also requires actions by the Department of State and many other agencies and departments.” “[ Vice] Adm. William E. Landay is at the forefront of pushing this at the Department of Defense. DSCA is running the lead and we are following up with support. We call it a historic transformation. Even though some might see us as slow to transform, we have acknowledged that there is a need for it – which is the first step in getting well,” he said.

The three emerging transformation areas include: Export Licensing (the ability for industry to sell and market abroad); Technolog y Security and Foreign Disclosure (TS&FD) (getting policies in place sooner); and Security Cooperation (getting cases in place in a timely manner to get the product into partners’ hands).

“We have attempted such reforms in the past with limited success,” Rixey admitted,

U.S. Navy Photo by Kaylee LaRocque

Members of Pakistan navy 28 Squadron gather with Rear Adm. Stephen Voetsch (fifth from left), then-director of the Navy International Programs Office, Ambassador of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan Husain Haqqani, Pakistan navy Chief of Staff Vice Adm. Shahid Iqbal, and Pakistan navy Capt. Abdul Basit near a Pakistan P-3C Orion aircraft during the U.S. Navy and Pakistan navy P-3C Orion Transfer Ceremony at Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Fla., April 30, 2010. P-3s are among the Excess Defense Articles passed along to partner nations.

but presented a positive prognosis for the latest round of transformation efforts.

“We have leadership support from the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State. And we are making progress substantially because they are pulling committees together and asking very hard questions. How are we currently doing? What are the metrics? What are we doing to get better? We still have to go through congressional approval on all of this but, subject to that approval, I think much of this could all be enacted in the near future.”

Efforts toward export reform have produced what Rixey described as “the mantra of the Four Singles” – calling for a single control licensing agency; a single export enforcement coordination center; a single export control list (versus two today – Department of Commerce and Department of State); and a single information technology system to speed up the process of adjudicating and getting things done.

“We are very busy getting these reform initiatives in place, supporting both DSCA and Defense Technology Security Administration as they press forward, and supporting the Secretary of Defense in his need to get things done,” he said.

Rixey summarized, “We believe that implementation of these initiatives will help the United States government achieve vital strategic goals. And we’re not just doing it for the Navy. We are also doing it for the Marine Corps and the Coast Guard. We also support component and combatant commanders for their theater engagement plans. We try to build capacity where it is needed. And, most importantly, we promote lasting relationships. We just need to find more

responsive tools to get things done quickly so that we can better execute our global maritime security mission.”

Looking toward the future, Rixey sees challenges in Security Cooperation stemming from a combination of shrinking global budgets and “trying to make our processes and the domestic processes of the major emerging markets interoperable.”

“I think that will be one of our biggest challenges,” he said. “They have restrictions on what they can buy and how they can buy it. And we have restrictions on what we can sell. Fortunately, DSCA is extremely busy in looking ahead and working on interoperability and the alignment of procurement processes.”

Asked about a specific NIPO message for industry, Rixey pointed to “multiple venues that we use here at NIPO to

“We try to build capacity where it is needed. And, most importantly, we promote lasting relationships. We just need to find more responsive tools to get things done quickly so that we can better execute our global maritime security mission.”

reach out to industry,” adding, “The first thing we do is to sit down with them and explain who we are, what we do, and what it takes for us to do it. We tell them to plan early; plan often; but talk to us. The sooner they have dialogue with us, the better. Sometimes when you are trying to identify the gaps in maritime capacity the industry business development representatives might pick up information even before we do. Not always, but sometimes. And if they do give us a ‘heads up,’ it enables us to anticipate.

Or if they are seeing an area where they need an export license to sell, the sooner we can determine if there is an existing disclosure policy in place or what policy actions are needed, the better. We tell them: Talk to us; we’ll talk to you; we don’t have any hidden agendas and we don’t want this to be a mystery.”

Crafting his message to warfighters, Rixey returned to the NIPO mission statement, offering, “We really want to help build maritime partnerships. We want to build, promote, enable, and sustain it as quickly as possible. And at the same time, for the warfighters in uniform, we are protecting critical technologies.”

Rixey closed with messages to allies and partner nations that stressed the importance of relationships and the U.S. FMS process.

“Our mission statement is about maritime partnerships and not about ‘pushing product,’” he began. “We want to facilitate those partnerships. And if we do it through Foreign Military Sales, they will receive the total package. FMS might seem costly up front, because we include all costs, including interim support and all associated logistics elements. So it is actually an extraordinarily good investment.” n

31

U.S. Army Security Assistance Command

By scott r. gourley “Foreign Military Sales [FMS] is a Department of State program executed

by DSCA [Defense Security Cooperation Agency] within the Department of Defense,” explained Maj. Gen. Frank D. Turner III, commanding general, U.S. Army Security Assistance Command (USASAC). “At USASAC, we are the ‘co-lead,’ with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army for Defense Exports and Cooperation [DASA (DE&C)] to be the implementing agent for all of the U.S. Army sales under the FMS program.

“USASAC’s mission is to develop and manage Security Assistance programs globally – primarily Foreign Military Sales,” Turner said. “We have three different objectives: to build partner capacity; to support the engagement strategies of combatant commanders around the globe; and to strengthen U.S. global partnerships.”

Turner stressed the importance of the third objective – to build and to strengthen relationships, noting, “The Chief of Staff of the Army, Gen. [Raymond T.] Odierno, has a great saying in one of his strategic documents: That is to ‘cultivate friends before you need them.’ And that’s what we do. So, the way I explain our mission to our employees and others inside the Security Assistance enterprise is that Security Assistance and Foreign Military Sales are tools that we use to

32

advance our national security objectives.

They are really a means to an end of building and maintaining relationships with foreign countries.”

The formal USASAC organization is rather small, with only 420 to 430 direct employees inside the command.

“But what’s more i mpor ta nt i s that they lead a Security Assistance enterprise that is as big as 9,000 to 10,000 people who are involved in

“Every time you build an FMS case, you are building necessary security capabilities in that country and you’re maintaining close ties with their military and government.”

this effort,” Turner explained. “So we’re a small organization leading a very large enterprise. We don’t exercise command and control over most of those involved in the enterprise.

But we do get everybody moving in the right direction in executing the delivery of capabilities that foreign governments desire and contract for.”

Turner highlighted many of the other enterprise organizations, including Life Cycle Management Commands (LCMCs) in Army Materiel Command like Tank-automotive and Armaments Com ma nd, Av iat ion a nd M i s si le Command, Joint Munitions Command, a nd Com mu n icat ion s-Elect ron ics Command. In addition, he noted the critical contributions of U.S. Army Contracting Command in performing the underlying contracting services as well as the program executive offices and program managers who assist in system acquisition.

“We use the same structure that the U.S. Army acquisition programs use to satisfy Foreign Military Sales demand,” he observed, adding, “It is the orchestration of that enterprise toward Foreign Military Sales that USASAC performs.”

In add it ion to headq ua r ters personnel, the current orchestration of FMS programs includes the work

U.S. Army photo

of two USASAC subordinate organizations: the Off ice of the Program Manager Saud i A ra bia n Nat iona l Guard (OPM SA NG) Modernization Program in Riyadh, Saudi A rabia, and the U.S. Army Security Assistance Training Management Organization (USASATMO) at Fort Bragg, N.C. Describing OPM SANG as “a one of a kind” organization, Turner explained that it was “something that the Saudis asked for and that we have been providing since March of 1973. It is similar in mission to the other 119 security cooperation organizations with countries around the world, but it has been expanded. It is totally funded by the Saudis – everything from salaries down to the office supplies used.

“USASATMO is essential to ou r broader global mission,” he continued.

“They have a ‘line of credit,’ if you will, of 274 soldiers that they draw on in order to provide training teams to customers on an ‘as needed’ basis.

“For instance, when we sell certain systems to foreign partners and that country requests a training team to train their pilots or their tankers, for example, on the specific systems that they bought, they will contract for a Technical Assistance Fielding Team [TAFT] to deploy to that country and conduct the specific training requested. And each TAFT is a customized contract to address specifically what the country wants,” he said.

While the majority of TAFT members are U.S. service personnel, Turner noted that some civilians and contractors are also used “where it makes sense.”

As of this writing, USASATMO has 24 teams operating in 18 different countries.

Trainers supervising 60 mm mortar firing. USASATMO has been in a highly successful program to train Albanian army personnel in a series of combative skills and tasks.

33

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED ON TIME, ON TARGET

ANY TIME, ANYWHERE, AT HOME OR IN THEATER

OPERATIONAL EQUIPMENT & LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS OPERATIONAL EQUIPMENT

LOGISTICS SOLUTIONS

STREAMLINED PROCUREMENT

TACTICAL & SPECIAL OPERATIONS

KITTING & ASSEMBLY

MULTIPLE GSA SCHEDULES

MAINTENANCE, REPAIR & OPERATIONS (MRO)

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT

SPECIAL OPERATIONS & FES TLS PROGRAMS

EXPEDITIONARY OPERATIONS

TOTAL ASSET VISIBILITY

DOD EMALL

MEDICAL OPERATIONS

WAREHOUSING

NSN ITEMS

FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES

INVENTORY MANAGEMENT

8(A), HUBZONE & SDVOSB PARTNERING

No matter what uniform you wear, our goal is to provide you with the specialized equipment and related services you need to complete your mission at home, in theater, or around the globe.

ADS has expanded its global footprint to meet demands of all Commander’s Areas of Responsibility, including the Americas, Africa, Middle East, Europe, and Asia Pacific.

With representatives on five continents, the ADS International Team services defense and security contractors and protective services organizations in theater as well as U.S. Partner Nations, foreign governments, military and law enforcement organizations.

Contact an ADS Representative today for more information:

855.819.4276 • ADSINC.COM © 2012 ADS, Inc. The ADS logo is a registered trademark of ADS, Inc. A0258 4/12

U.S. Army photo by Sophia Bledsoe

While the majority of these teams are TAFT, Turner also highlighted a few “non-TAFT” teams performing missions he characterized as “more enduring.”

“For example, there is an OMC [Office of Military Cooperation-Kuwait [OMC-K] team, which is similar to OPM SANG,” he offered. “They don’t have the same scope, but they have some trainers and advisers there on an enduring basis – paid for by the Kuwaitis. And they are resourced out of the USASATMO organization at Fort Bragg.

“We’re also standing up a war college and a military academy in Eastern Europe – in Georgia and Estonia,” he added. “So, USASATMO performs specialty missions like these in addition to satisfying TAFT requirements.”

Asked how FMS sales for FY 12 compared to those of previous years, Turner responded, “Sales have been tremendous this year. In fact, currently we have sold over $16 billion worth of FMS this year. That ranks second as an all-time-high year – and we are only about halfway through the year.

The only other year we did better was FY 09, when we did $24.5 billion. So, with half the year remaining to go this year we have already implemented $16 billion worth of FMS. We also have about $13 billion at various stages ‘in the pipeline.’ And the interest in Foreign Military Sales continues to grow every day.”

Turner said that he expects the trend to continue “for the near future,” adding,

Two MD 530F helicopters delivered to Afghanistan for flight training duties via a USASAC Foreign Military Sale case.

35

“In my travels so far, I’ve seen great interest in U.S. equipment. It is seen as ‘the gold standard’ around the world and people are becoming more knowledgeable and comfortable with the Foreign Military Sales program. So I expect that the trend will continue over the next couple of years – maybe not at the rate we are going this year, but I think probably somewhere between $12 billion and $15 billion per year on average for the next four years.”

But it’s much more than just the hardware sales, with Turner characterizing FMS as “a means to the end of establishing positive partner relationships.”

“Every time you build an FMS case, you are building necessary security capa bi l it ies i n t hat cou nt r y a nd you’re maintaining close ties with their military and government,” he said. “So FMS really supports the new National Security Strategy the president outlined back in January, as well as Department of Defense guidance and the direction from Gen. Odierno that I mentioned earlier.

“It’s part of the Prevent/Shape/Win strategy for the Army,” he elaborated.

“There are aspects of it that support the ‘Prevent’ element, through building the capacity of foreign militaries to be able to take on more of a burden for their own self-defense. But it also has significant implications in the ‘Shape’ element, coming from the daily engagements and the ‘mil-to-mil’ relationships that you are establishing. And from my experience, I’ve seen how those ‘mil-to-mil’ relationships pay great benefits and have helped open doors to improve diplomatic and economic relationships with the countries where we are located.”

Turner said that those personal relationships are not only supported by “the gold standard” reputation of the equipment capabilities but also the processes involved in obtaining those capabilities.

“U.S. hardware is certainly sought after tremendously by our foreign partners,” he began. “But I think there are three other critical things that the FMS process gives you. One is the ‘total package’ approach, where a foreign military understands that they are going to receive from the U.S. the capability that they desire – not just the hardware or the system.”

He illustrated the observation from a personal experience he had while

working closely with one of our partners. A senior foreign officer related to Turner that “whenever we buy from the U.S., we know that we are going to get the capability that you promised us. And we know that you are going to stand behind it.”

“Secondly, our partners like the integrity of the process,” Turner added. “They trust the United States and they know they are entering into a contract with the U.S. government signing the contract.

And they enjoy the integrity that comes with a U.S. government contract.

“Finally, the third thing they respect is the transparency of the FMS process.

There are no hidden costs. It is all set

“They trust the United States and they know they are entering into a contract with the U.S. government signing the contract. And they enjoy the integrity that comes with a U.S. government contract.”

out – what they are buying and when it is going to be delivered. And at any time they can access, either through USASAC or systems that are made available to them, like the Security Cooperation Information Portal [SCIP], to see what is going on in their FMS case. And I don’t think they enjoy that level of transparency when they buy from other countries.”

As a representative example of ongoing activities that illustrate some of the points made, Turner offered an incident that took place during his previous

assignment with OPM SANG, involving Prince Miteb bin Abdullah, commander of the Saudi Arabian National Guard, upon their decision to buy all U.S. aircraft for their aviation brigades.

“We helped t hem develop t he comprehensive package that delivers a coherent capability,” he added. “It is going to be three brigades that they will field over a 15-year period. It will include 154 aircraft. It will include training – both at Fort Rucker [Ala.] and in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

We will provide the manuals. We are going to be involved in building the airfields. And we will be involved in putting together a sustainment package to keep the aircraft flying.”

Turner also emphasized the importance of an anticipated 40 to 50 U.S. military advisers who will help to advise the three brigades on how to employ their aircraft.

“That will be an enduring mission that will become part of OPM SANG’s force structure,” he said. “We will have 40 to 50 U.S. aviators over there, working closely with the Saudi aviators. And that is where the best mil-tomil relationships will be established and the best foreign policy will be affected, with people on the ground, day in and day out.”

He continued, “Another great ongoing example is the work we are doing with the Iraqis, involving the M1A1 tanks we sold them, the M109 field artillery pieces, the M198 field artillery pieces, and many vehicles. In each of those cases we are providing them with these articles in a total package approach that includes manuals, sustainment, and technical support. And the 157 people there in the Office of Security Cooperation-Iraq [OSC-I] are out with Iraqi units and helping them to field these items and advise them on how to employ them.

“This is the natural evolution of our combat operations for the last nine years in Iraq,” he said. “The partnership and the relationship that we have with the Iraqis now is something that we did not have before. And that is a partnership possible through Foreign Military Sales.”

Asked where he saw the greatest challenges over the next two to five years, Turner pointed to the increased FMS levels.

37

“From the $24.5 billion of sales that we did in ’09, to about $14 billion in both ’10 and ’11, to now $16 billion and possibly going as high as $20 billion this year, that all implies a great deal of work in the next two to five years.

The typical FMS case lasts about 5.5 years, where we are delivering items or providing sustainment. And some are much longer than that. So a lot of these cases are becoming much more complex, with a bow wave of workload coming from all of the increases in recent sales. And we have to make sure that we are operating this FMS process as efficiently, effectively, and responsively as we can to ensure we deliver on the promises we have made.”

Su m m a r i z i ng h i s me s s age for warfighters, Turner offered, “Through the effective execution of Security Assistance programs to our foreign partners – and right now we have 145

different countries where we have FMS cases – we are building partners for U.S. warfighters in all services. And we see the benefits daily, not only in the mil-to-mil relationships but also in improved diplomatic and economic relationships that we have with other countries. So we are also helping to execute the national security strategy that the warfighter is involved with day in/day out.”

His industry message of recent and future Security Assistance programs noted “tremendous potential for our industry partners to grow business overseas.”

“I know that more industries are initiating business development offices overseas,” he said. “And I think the potential for continued strength in FMS can translate to prosperity for many of those businesses who join in partnerships with foreign militaries.

An Mi-17 helicopter takes off from Kirkuk, Iraq, for the last time March 1, 2011. The entire fleet of helicopters was transferred to Habbaniyah, Iraq, following the end of the flight-training contract between the Iraqi Army Aviation Command and the U.S. Army Security Assistance Training Management Organization.

“We appreciate the opportunities to work with our allies and to be in partnership with them,” he concluded.

“Many of them have been in combat operations with the United States for the last decade. We have great partners, and the U.S. government and U.S. military are deeply appreciative of the support that we get from our allies around the world. For our part, USASAC seeks to be an exceptional partner that will continue to help our foreign partners meet their security requirements.” n

39

Foreign Military Sales and Foreign Military Financing

By J.R. Wilson

Security Cooperation (SC) is a key Department of Defense (DoD) mission. SC programs, which include Foreign Military Sales (FMS) and Foreign Military Financing (FMF), have been linchpins of American foreign and military policy for decades, authorized under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to help other nations secure their own borders, bolster U.S. security abroad, and promote interoperability with U.S. forces.

U.S. Army up-armored HMMWVs await refurbishment before being transferred over to Iraq under the Army’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. The U.S. Army Security Assistance Command manages the Army’s FMS program, which was a key element in equipping and training Iraq’s security forces prior to the withdrawal of U.S. forces.

40

41

U.S. Army photo

AgustaWestland. The future in aviation.

At AgustaWestland, we have invested in design and innovation for a full spectrum of missions. The AW149, AW189, and AW169 – all with advanced, vertical lift technology. We are also working on the next generation of tiltrotor aircraft. The DoD is proceeding with a Joint Multi-Role (JMR) program to replace the current generation of reconnaissance, attack and utility aircraft. We are ready with innovation, leadership and advanced technology for tomorrow. To learn more visit www.agustawestland.com/content/research-development.

LEADING THE FUTURE agustawestland.com

Lockheed Martin photo

FMF is a State Department appropr iat ion t hat i s u sed t o prov ide grants to foreign partners to procure U.S. defen se goods a nd ser v ices.

I nter nat iona l M i l ita r y Educat ion and Training (IMET) funds are also State Department appropriations, and IMET funds the cost of foreign students to attend U.S. military schools and training centers. FMF and IMET are implemented through the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA).

FMS refers to the process through which a foreign partner pays DSCA to contract with companies to procure defense goods and services. FMS uses the U.S. military acquisition system, DSCA works closely with the State Department (which must approve FMS), and together DSCA and State notify Congress of proposed sales and brief members of Congress and their staffs.

“FMS is the system, the process used to provide goods and services to our strategic allies; FMF is the funding to help that happen,” A nn Cataldo, principal director of DSCA’s Bu si ness Operat ion s Di rectorate, said. “FMS is a process that must be

transparent and inspire confidence.

FMF is used in that process to help meet the mutual defense requirements of the U.S. and our allies.” Not all FMS is funded by FMF, which only comes into play when a partner lacks the immediate funding needed to procure U.S. defense articles and services.

DoD – especially the geographic Combatant Commanders (CCDRs) and the Security Cooperation Organizations (SCOs) – has extensive input on both SC policy and specific nation and regional needs, including funding assistance recommendations. The Office of the Secretary of Defense and the individual services determine what equipment is available for sale or lease, in keeping with AECA and ITAR (International Traffic in Arms Regulations) restrictions.

“For a country to be willing to cooperate in the area of national defense – perhaps the most sensitive area for any nation – they have to be sure about the nature of the relationship with the United States. When a country buys an advanced U.S. defense system through our FMS, DCS [Direct Commercial Sales], or FMF programs, they aren’t simply buying a

One of six C-130J Super Hercules ordered

by India under the U.S. Foreign Military Sales program departs Marietta, Ga., on Dec. 15, 2011.

product, they are also seeking a partnership with the United States,” said Assistant Secretary of State Andrew J. Shapiro, Bureau of Political-Military Affairs.

“These programs both reinforce our diplomatic relations and establish a longterm security relationship. The complex and technical nature of advanced defense systems frequently requires constant collaboration and interaction between countries over the life of that system – decades in many cases. This cooperation therefore helps build bilateral ties and creates strong incentives for recipient countries to maintain good relations with the United States.”

DSCA works with recipient nations, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, DoD’s regional CCDRs, embassy-based SCOs, and others to coordinate the efficient and effective use of FMS and FMF.

43

“The most basic level point of entry for any country [seeking FMS] would be the Security Cooperation Office in the U.S. Embassy, which looks at a country’s requirements and helps them develop programs. The next level up is the Geographic Combatant Commanders, who look at everything regionally.

Then an FMS case works its way up to DSCA, which works with the military departments, State Department and the Office of the Secretary of Defense to assess whether it is U.S. national

44

security interest to provide a foreign partner a particular capability, and if it is, which authorities can be used to build a Security Cooperation program.”

A SCO, usually led by a military officer, reports to the U.S. ambassador and usually the regional CCDR. DSCA is tasked with training SCO-assigned personnel on Security Cooperation policies, guidelines, and rules, because the SCO plays an important part in both Security Assistance (SA) and SC, which are not the same thing.

“Security Assistance is used by State to develop relationships with other nations and build long-term capabilities,” Cataldo said. “Security Cooperation is a much broader concept, encompassing Security Assistance as well as DoD programs, established since 9/11, to train and equip partner security

forces so they can counter terrorists who threaten their stability, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan. Security Cooperation efforts to get equipment into the field immediately often grow into longerrange Security Assistance.

“A good example of a new authority is the Special Defense Acquisition Funds, which had been decapitalized in the 1990s,” she said. “But in 2011, State and DoD put forward recommendations to recapitalize that fund to allow DoD to buy certain military articles in advance of need and hold those articles to meet urgent needs. That means we can use the normal planned procurement times and processes [for FMS] and level out peaks and valleys.”

Scott Sch less, DSC A’s pr i ncipal director for strateg y, h igh l ighted section 1206 of the National Defense

U.S. Coast Guard photo

The first of four CN235-300M maritime patrol aircraft – which are based on the Coast Guard’s HC-144A Ocean Sentry – accepted by the Coast Guard’s Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program on behalf of the government of Mexico.

U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Chad Menegay, 196th MPAD, 25th Infantry division, USD-C

Authorization Act, which “is about a $350 million appropriation of DoD funds we can use to buy defense articles and services for countries which are combating terrorism or conducting stability operations, as well as those nations participating in coalition operations in Afghanistan.” DSCA also helps execute Afghan Security Force funds appropriated to DoD as well as an appropriation to help the Pakistani military fight its counterinsurgency battles.

One of the key roles of DSCA is to resource the Security Cooperation community. DSCA collects a 3.8 percent surcharge for FMS administration funds because the whole premise of FMS is that it is revenue

neutral to the American taxpayer. These funds are used to pay for the personnel, information technology systems, and office space of the DSCA and the agencies that execute Security Cooperation programs. DSCA’s Strategy Directorate works with the implementing agencies to anticipate future budget requirements three years out for the Program Objective Memorandum (POM) to ensure the community has sufficient resources to implement the Security Cooperation programs. The Strategy Directorate also produces an annual FMS forecast, which assists the community’s planning efforts.

“We have two other major roles,” Schless said.

“There is a tremendous return on investment, which is probably one of the most undersold elements of this in the federal government.

The more ties we have with other nations, the better the relationships.

FMS builds those ties at all levels.”

An Iraqi army tanker with the 9th Armored Division drives an M1A1 Abrams tank under the instruction of soldiers with Company C, 1st Battalion, 18th Infantry Regiment, 2nd Advise and Assist Brigade, 1st Infantry Division, United States Division-Center, Jan. 16, 2011, at Camp Taji, Iraq.

“The Policy Office is the gatekeeper for the ‘Security Assistance Management Manual,’ which contains the policies and procedures to implement the laws that govern FMS. “The second role is to support the agency in terms of reviewing keystone national security documents such as the ‘Guidance of the Employment of the Force’ or the ‘Defense Planning Guidance,’ and making sure SC is reflected accurately in those documents.

One element of that function is increasingly to help [Vice] Adm. [William E.] Landay, the director, DSCA look out five to 10 years to anticipate the challenges we will face as a community.”

Schless explained that one of DSCA’s responsibilities is to identify DoD’s recommendations for future year FMF expenditures by country and transit that request to the State Department.

“There is a high demand for these

45

TWO COMPANIES. ONE MISSION.

Globally recognized as the leader in night vision, Aviation Specialties Unlimited (ASU) and L-3 Warrior Systems consistently deliver superior night vision, precision laser aiming, and thermal imaging systems for U.S. and international military allies.

Working together, we provide the largest selection of aviation and ground force NVIS products that meet DoD military specified lifetime requirements for night vision applications. With our extensive logistics resources and customer service experience, we can adapt to a rapidly evolving defense industry that will leave you saying, “Mission accomplished.�

www.asu-nvg.com

This advertisement is neither paid for nor sponsored, in whole or in part, by any element of the United States Government.

L-3com.com/WarriorSystems

funds and our role is to make sure everyone has an opportunity to have their voices heard. But State also has a lot of constituencies to consider. So we go country by country, looking at their requirements and determining whether FMF is a good fit.

“There also are presidential FMF commitments every year that make up the majority of the approximately $6 billion appropriation. Israel and Egypt get the two biggest chunks of that; Pakistan and Jordan also get significant amounts. But when you have made large commitments to four or five major recipients, you have much smaller amounts for the rest of the world. That’s where we lead the process to identify DoD’s requirements, which is a difficult process because it may result in only $360 million out of that $6 billion remaining for everyone else.

“FMF funds are good for seven years so we don’t always have to use it in the year appropriated.”

The bulk of FMS transactions each year involves the recipient nations’ own funds. “When it comes down to the use of a country’s own funds, each decides what it wants to procure, but it is then up to the U.S. to decide what we want to sell them,” Schless said. “DSCA is part of the interagency process; but the State Department and the White House make the final decision on whether to offer to sell a particular weapon system to a foreign partner.”

Schless commented that “FMS has experienced tremendous growth in the last four or five years, which creates a lot of jobs in the U.S. economy. So FMS provides increased capabilities for the recipient nations while also keeping a critical industrial base alive in the U.S.” Moreover, FMS introduces economies of scale, permitting DoD to procure some defense articles and services at a reduced cost, thus saving the American taxpayer money.

Cataldo said that also has led to much closer relationships among U.S. policymakers in making decisions affecting both FMS and national security strategy.

“I see a growing mutual respect and more open lines of communication between DoD and State, recognizing what we have in common,” she said, adding that, in turn, has changed the very nature of FMS. “Basically, we

have moved from reactive to much more anticipatory.”

Given the size of these programs, the nature of some of the weapons systems involved and their importance to U.S. global interests and national security, DSCA also is part of a multi-level, multi-party oversight and auditing process. A key element of that – and one that, if violated, can prevent a country from future participation – is each recipient nation’s pledge that FMF monies and FMS purchases will be employed only internally and for the purposes approved.

“We sit at the crossroads of State and DoD, both of which have inspector generals who monitor specific programs, along with the DoD comptroller. In addition, customer countries send their representatives to us with lists of questions because they audit these programs, as well,” Cataldo explained.

“Finally, I have a review structure run from DSCA Headquarters, including visits to our overseas offices to make sure the funds are managed properly.

Those i nclude f i nancial management reviews with our most strategic customers, review ing their entire programs, resources, and how they are being used.”

As to the future of both FMS and FMF, especially as DoD and State Department budgets contract, both Cataldo and Schless see the growth and changes of the past decade not as specific to the war in Southwest Asia, but as a significant part of the nation’s future security and international relations.

“Building partner-nation capacity is increasingly important in a world filled with a greater variety of threats.

We want foreign partners to be able to handle insurgencies and regional conflicts without the U.S. and its allies being drawn into those. And if the U.S. does get involved, we want these partner nations to be able to operate alongside U.S. forces as part of a larger international coalition. So we view it as crucial, not only for U.S. security, but for global security,” Schless said.

“I think we have to be prepared for lots of perturbations in the Middle East – and FMS/FMF will remain a key part of our national security strategy going forward. The new post-9/11 authorities will continue, albeit at lower funding,

not only for DoD, but also for State. So, overall, we will continue to have this as a mission; the funding levels may go down a bit, but not to pre-9/11 levels.”

Cataldo added DSCA and all the other agencies involved also need to take the lessons learned and best practices developed since 9/11, the incorporation of urgent requirements into the FMS system, and the impact on manpower, procurement, and responsiveness, and ensure those are maintained and continue to improve in the years to come as new initiatives develop.

“There is a whole new dimension in how we run the business in meeting these chang ing requirements. We constantly review all aspects of money management, the rates we charge, listen to our customers during the financial reviews. So to me, the future looks like continuing better business processes to further foster stronger ties and relationships,” she said.

But in a time of economic hardship and ever tighter budgets for all government agencies, a key consideration regarding FMS and FMF is the return on investment to the American taxpayer – and getting that information out to Congress and the public.

“There is a tremendous return on investment, which is probably one of the most undersold elements of this in the federal government,” Cataldo concluded. “The more ties we have w ith other nations, the better the relationships. FMS builds those ties at all levels. It also is big business.

Many of our partners invest a lot of their own money in these sales because they believe in us and our equipment.

That helps our military industrial base and our own military, because we can avail ourselves of the resulting economies of scale.

“Even with the grant program, those funds typically go right back into our industrial base, often as the totality of a nation’s investment in equipment, sustainment, and training. So you have the building of strong relationships, additional procurements for our industry, and, if we can train our partners to think as we think and fight as we fight and we have common objectives, a better environment for our military around the globe and U.S. national security at home.” n

47

The Voice of the COCOMs in Security Cooperation Interview with Deputy Director for Partnership Strategy Brig. Gen. Maryanne Miller By jan tegler

A

m e r i c a’s S e c u r i t y Cooperation apparatus is a machine made up of many components. If the Defense Secu r it y Cooperat ion Agency (DSCA) handles the figurative “nuts and bolts” of the process, the office of the Deputy Director for Partnership Strategy (DDPS) could be said to be the chief advocate for the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) combatant commands (COCOMs) in Security Cooperation.

In addition, the DDPS acts as the principal adviser to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Director for Strategic Plans and Policy (DJ-5) on all global and functional matters, both within the U.S. government (USG) and with international partners abroad, pertaining to partnership capacity development.

In other words, Brig. Gen. Maryanne Miller, USAF, and her office are the conduits for America’s warfighters in Security Cooperation, working on their behalf with Congress, the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), the Department of State, and other USG entities to help them achieve their Security Cooperation goals. The DDPS tracks the broad sweep of Security Cooperation activities undertaken by the COCOMs, keeping the CJCS abreast of developments while working to stay ahead of any issues with Security Assistance policy or programs.

Appointed DDPS in January 2012, Miller has amassed more than 4,800 hours as an Air Force air mobility pilot. A graduate of the Air Command and Staff College, the Air War College, and Trident University, with a master’s degree in business administration, Miller also commanded two air mobility wings. We spoke with her to find out more about the DDPS’s role.

48

is basically how we proceed; congressional appropriations help us do what we need to do. All of our work complements activities in the Department of State, since State is the Security Assistance leader within the U.S. government. State’s mainly responsible for foreign policy development and implementation in coordination with other federal agencies.

Consequently, we consult with and work together with State on all of our efforts.

Who does the DDPS represent?

Jan Tegler: How do you interact with DSCA? Brig. Gen. Maryanne Miller: Our efforts with DSCA involve liaison and collaboration. We have a liaison officer from DSCA sitting with us in Partnership Strategy.

DSCA oversees and implements the “nuts and bolts” piece of Security Cooperation.

From the time a Security Cooperation tool is identified and agreed to, an FMS [Foreign Military Sales] case for example, DSCA manages the activity – paperwork, execution – all the way to the delivery date and beyond. DDPS doesn’t get directly involved, but we work closely with DSCA to have insight into its activity. We stay deeply engaged in information sharing and understanding so we know where highpriority COCOM programs are along their implementation path. We help identify any problems and work them to closure.

What’s the primary role of the DDPS and your office?

Within DoD, we execute foreign Security Assistance programs based on authorities. What Congress authorizes

We specifically represent the chairman as part of the Joint Staff and the COCOMs. For my functions on the Joint Staff, there is an equivalent OSD-level representative. We work the same issues; we just represent the COCOMs. OSD represents the military services and takes those perspectives across the river [to the National Security Staff (NSS)] and we represent the COCOMs’ views within the interagency process.

Your responsibilities are described as: “Develop DoD, USG, and international partner capabilities, plans, and programs to conduct stability operations, security forces assistance, humanitarian relief, and disaster assistance; Oversee all DoD security cooperation activities to include planning, programming, and funding.”

What vehicle allows the DDPS to do this and where does the DDPS fit in?

We do this through the COCOM Theater Campaign Plans. With guidance from the “Guidance for Employment of the Force” [GEF], a DoD document, the COCOMs build their theater campaign plans oriented toward a number of lines of effort to support the GEF end states.

U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Adam Fischman

The lines of effort include supporting counterinsurgency efforts, combating weapons of mass destruction, protecting freedom of movement and the flow of commerce, and building partnership capacity. Those are the main areas of effort the COCOMs focus on. The investments in these engagements, we hope, will lead to building the capacity of our partner nations to support their internal security and their ability to carry out their sovereign responsibilities to protect their people, as well as prevent or mitigate conflicts or instability.

DoD has a role that dovetails with State: to accomplish a whole of government approach to Security Assistance and Cooperation. DDPS monitors the process and authorities for the COCOMs as they build their Theater Campaign Plans; these plans guide COCOM efforts to build partner capacity.

What aspects of Security Cooperation does the DDPS focus on?

There are a huge number of activities and levels of effort that are occurring within Security Cooperation that require tracking and focus. What helps us track and stay ahead of any issues with programs or policy is a tool called the Global Theater Security Cooperation Management Information System [GTSCMIS]. It’s an

IT system that is in development to maintain the worldwide database for Security Cooperation programs. We’re having some issues sustaining funding for the system, but we’re working through them because everyone has realized how critical this tool is for us in getting a global picture of Security Cooperation.

The management system will help us easily answer critical questions.

Where are we using our money? Are we aligned with strategy? Otherwise, we have to make a phone call to all of the COCOMs and we just get raw data that’s being tracked by someone on an Excel spreadsheet. There are some problems with that method, as you can imagine.

If you have an IT system that can track all of the programs, you can easily query what’s going on in a certain country. It gives you situational awareness. It’s a low-cost platform because you’re only using one system DoD-wide instead of employing numerous disparate systems that might cost 10 times as much in terms of money and effort. We’re trying to improve it so each COCOM can use it easily and standardize processes/ tracking so we can find out simply if we are supporting cooperation objectives.

Developing policy guidance that assists the COCOMs in their Security Cooperation

Marines from Company D, Anti-Terrorism Battalion, 4th Marine Division, from Elmendorf Air Force, Alaska, exit a Hawaii Army National Guard CH-47F Chinook helicopter with Botswana Defense Force (BDF) soldiers at Thebephatshwa Air Base in Botswana, Africa, Aug. 3, 2012, during Southern Accord 2012 (SA12). SA12 brings together the BDF, U.S. Army Africa, and other U.S. military forces to foster Security Cooperation while conducting combined, joint humanitarian assistance, peacekeeping operations, and aeromedical evacuation exercises. SA12 is a key element in a series of military-to-military activities to demonstrate the strong partnership between host-country militaries.

activities is your main means of advocacy on their behalf. Can you give an example of this type of assistance?

As the COCOMs work to accomplish their objectives, they may run out of options. More specifically, they can run out of money or other means to achieve those objectives. At that point, they communicate to us that policy may need to be changed or the appropriation, the actual dollars they need to execute their programs, needs to be augmented. That’s when they come to us to advocate for more flexible authorities or more regional authorities

49

Satellite IP Comms Technology

Shipbuilding

Command Centers

VT Hackney

VT Halter Marine

VT iDirect

Our family of companies has proven ability to meet your needs

VT Systems

A Reputation for Engineering Ability

vt-systems.com

Training and Simulation

Road Construction Equipment

Repowering the venerable M113 with a new powerpack that includes the Allison X200 transmission provides durability, reliability and performance equal to a new M113A3 or better than a new M113A2, at a fraction of the cost.

Rugged Computers

VT Miltope

VT MĂ„K

VT LeeBoy

Specifying the Allison X200 also makes your fleet compatible with the U.S. military’s most modern configuration, the M113A3.

A common logistics base for allied and coalition forces is a potent force multiplier for worldwide operations.

www.allisontransmission.com/militaryproducts

– or whatever fits their particular needs in order to reach the Security Cooperation objectives within their region.

We have weekly conversations with the COCOMs to help them understand the authorities and guidelines, limitations and responsibilities. If there are barriers to the COCOMs in getting to their end states, we talk with OSD and see if we can find a different way to proceed, such as restructuring an authority or drafting a legislative proposal.

It’s our job to enable the COCOMs to get their missions done while supporting the chairman and assisting with U.S. government’s operations worldwide.

How do you fulfill your role as an adviser to the CJCS? We advise the chairman on all global and functional matters pertaining to the development of partnership capacity.

That includes: the plans, execution, and supervision of FMS, IMET [International Military Education and Training, bringing international officials into our educational system to go through classes or leadership development], coalition funds, technology transfer, excess defense articles, export licensing, foreign disclosure and information sharing, humanitarian assistance, the Global Training and Equip program, and more. We work through all these processes and advise the chairman on the best way forward with all of these authorities.

U.S. Army photo by Spc. Samantha Parks

One of your roles is described as, “Build and sustain coalitions for U.S. missions in Kosovo, Afghanistan, and other multinational operations worldwide.” That would seem to involve aspects that go beyond the Security Cooperation mission.

How do you execute that?

We have to take into account the diplomatic and political considerations present as we build and sustain coalitions. We try to synchronize as many stakeholders in the USG as possible when it comes to building a coalition.

Libya is a good example. We tracked agreements detailing how many troops a nation would commit and what other government entities would bring to the coalition. We didn’t make any of those decisions, but we were the ones tracking it, building the matrix, populating the matrix, and keeping tabs on the plan as this coalition was built across the USG.

A Jordanian H-60 Black Hawk flies overhead with Combined Joint Task Force Spartan participants ready to fast rope onto a building in a mock village at King Abdullah II Special Operations Training Center during a capabilities demonstration for His Majesty King Abdullah II bin Al-Hussein of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and his guests on May 16, 2012. Seven of the 19 nations participating in Eager Lion 12 took part in the demonstration, a key event during the exercise. The intent is to strengthen military-to-military relationships and interoperability through a joint, whole-of-government, multinational approach to meet current and future complex national security challenges.

We don’t interact with foreign governments regarding partnership strategy, but the J-5 has six different regional offices that work with foreign defense attachés.

That’s how we received information about which assets a particular nation was willing to dedicate to the coalition and their rationale for doing so. It was important to understand that logic firsthand.

In some instances, a nation just wanted to publicly acknowledge they supported the coalition. Others wanted to actually provide weapons systems or munitions.

We consolidated that information so a plan could be mapped out for the coalition under Operation Unified Protector.

This office tracked that information for the chairman and, in essence, enabled the USG, across this coalition development plan, to get the job done.

We provided updates every six hours to the USG identifying which activities were planned and which activities were completed. That’s how we help the USG build and sustain the mechanics of a coalition. We track what forces are promised and what forces are generated. We’re a one-stop shop to provide an overview of a coalition plan for the chairman and the USG. We detail what commitments are agreed, what processes and connections we still need to make, and generally what stage a plan is in.

Can you give an example of how you refined or created an authority for a COCOM? There’s a new authority now that’s part of a pilot program called the GSCF [Global Security Contingency Fund]. The Joint Staff, OSD, and the State Department worked together to get the GSCF approved in the 2012 NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act]. The fund has broader authorities, a three-year time limit, and allows the COCOMs to do more.

GSCF specifically allows, “assistance to military and other security forces that conduct border and maritime security, internal security and counterterrorism operations as well as government agencies responsible for such forces.”

It’s a pilot authority, but it got the COCOMs exactly what they wanted – something broader and longer term. Most authorities are approved year by year. So as you execute something in the first year, you might be making great progress, but if the authority is not renewed the next year, you can lose momentum.

GSCF is a perfect example of how the government interagency came together to meet the needs of the COCOMs to satisfy Security Cooperation objectives. There’s a whole process being developed around GSCF. It’s a major win for the COCOMs. n

51

International Military Education and Training

By J.R. Wilson

International Military Education and Training (IMET) is both a broad-based concept and a specific program, although the latter – the State Department’s IMET – covers only a portion of the former. The various programs that fall under the broad concept are funded primarily by the Department of Defense (DoD) and State Department, with DoD handling implementation of Title 10 security cooperation programs, Title 22 foreign relations support, and Section 1206 global security assistance train and equip efforts under the National Defense Authorization Act, among others.

A U.S. Army Security Assistance Training Management Organization (USASATMO) trainer uses toy soldiers to demonstrate the proper squad line formation to Namibian Defense Force soldiers during a Small Unit Tactics class. USASATMO’s Engagement Branch Mobile Training Team conducted a Warrior Leader Instructor Training Course as part of establishing a Namibian noncommissioned officer training course.

52

53

U.S. navy photo

Photo by Lance Cpl. Paul Peterson

The major it y of t hose a re t he responsibility of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), primarily through Building Partner Capacity (BPC) and IMET, providing everything from weapons- and field operations-related training to helping newly developing militaries understand U.S. command structure – both DoD and the military/ civilian government relationship – military law, human rights, and the development and use of noncommissioned officers (NCOs).

“When you look at Building Partner Capacity, it can be divided into institution building, organization, individuals, medical capabilities, or even ministry engagements that try to assist developing national strategies and institutions, from military structures to pieces of special military education,” explained James McGaughey, DSCA’s BPC programs deputy.

“Our division has a diverse portfolio, not only the myriad Title 10 and Title 22 and traditional other funding streams, but many more aspects that could be lumped into the general term ‘building partner capacity,’ including various aspects of FMS [Foreign Military Sales].

So it is not only training and equipping partners, but the actual sale and delivery of equipment.”

Building Partner Capacity stood up under that name in 2007 to manage and execute the various programs – both DoD and State – DSCA was being tasked to handle. As new programs arose and old ones were merged or restructured, the new division’s duties proved not only diverse, but sometimes difficult to “pigeonhole.” Training and equipment programs under Section 1206, for example, have nothing to do with foreign military training, according to McGaughey.

“Instead, the U.S. government is the customer, assisting partner nations in developing their capacity to deal w ith terrorism and insu rgencies.

Prog rams such as the Combating Terrorism Fellowship and others are allocated funding from DoD appropriations,” he said. “Additional funding on capacity building is provided through the Special Defense Acquisition Fund, a new program designed to accelerate the availability of select items of high demand and long lead-time to foreign customers to meet urgent requirements.”

“We’ve evolved since 9/11 from a very military-centric engagement with service members in other nations to now a great number of programs with small footprints, less cost, that lead to enduring relationships and aligning those programs with DoD and State policies within each region. And a key portion of any DoD-related training, here or abroad, is the requirement that training for all personnel include human rights,” he said.

IMET, on the other hand, brings foreign students to the United States to train with American military personnel and those from other nations. Some Expanded IMET (EIMET) courses are conducted in other countries, primarily to reach more students and achieve a better mix of civilian and military – in some cases, including people who have never been brought together before in the same forum.

“There is a difference between the term ‘international military education and training’ and the IMET program, which is a source of funding from State.

So the former really is talking about all countries with which we do business, regardless of the source of funding,” explained Kay Judkins, DSCA’s IMET Programs and Policy manager. “There are more than 130 nations involved – military officers and enlisted, civilians from their MoDs [ministries of defense], and non-MoD civilians such as members of parliament.

Left to right: 2nd Lt. Daniel Moravec, Army of the Czech Republic; 1st Lt. Vinicius Oliveira, Brazilian Navy; 1st Lt. Cortess Whilby, Jamaican Defense Force; and Staff Sgt. Tamas Batary, Hungarian Army, are enrolled as international students at the Marine Corps Engineer School (MCES)aboard Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, N.C., for 2012. The longest course offered by MCES is four months, and international students have the ability to attend most of the school’s courses. They undergo the same training as the Marines who attend MCES and will return to their respective militaries to help put their unique experiences training with the Marine Corps to work for their home nations.

“Under the IMET program, as established in 1979, for FY 11, we trained approximately 7,000 students from nations that met specific requirements set out by Congress; that is one of several approaches for foreign students to receive training. IMET is not an individual program, but an umbrella under which a number of programs run. That includes training as part of FMS and other funding authorities – a total of 16 this year.”

The number trained each year has been fairly steady, although the failure of recent budgets to keep up with rising costs has led to some decline in the past couple of years.

55

56

IMET also provides funding for other nations to teach English to prospective students, some of whom then attend the Defense Language Institute in San Antonio, Texas, to further their command of English. Although some nations pay their own travel and living expenses, most are covered by IMET. Before it reaches that point, however, the specific schools and classes are fully vetted to ensure they meet both the needs of the nations involved and the goals of U.S. policymakers.

“I meet with military and security officers, COCOM [combatant command] representatives, and so on to review the training requirements submitted by the security officers to ensure they meet both State and COCOM requirements for specific nations,” Judkins said.

“The security operations officers are expected to plan their IMET programs two years out.

Gunnery Sgt. Charles Maddox (left), a Drill Instructor (DI) School squad instructor, explains how to properly form troops for formation to Sgt. 1st Class Shiam Manniesingh during drill practice July 21, 2011, Parris Island, S.C. Manniesingh, of the Republic of Suriname, was one of three foreign students in DI School class 4-11.

“We review the programs for each country under IMET to make sure they do meet those goals. We also have schoolhouse representatives there, especially those dealing with EIMET courses, so they can find the right courses to meet all those objectives.”

The world has undergone massive changes in the past quarter-century, from the collapse of the Soviet Union and end of the Cold War to the rise of international, non-state terrorism as a primary enemy to governments across

Photo by Lance Cpl. Javarre Glanton

“I’m hoping the IMET program will continue to grow, but we also know the DoD budget will be trimmed. And in the past, training has been an easy target for reductions. But I believe most people on the Hill are supportive of IMET. It’s a hard program to measure, but we know it has had success in providing foreign officers and enlisted personnel with a better understanding of the U.S. military,” she said.

“Part of IMET is field study. We have international military officers at almost all U.S. military schools, which also are responsible for the field studies program, which covers not only how our military works, but also gives a perspective on how the U.S. functions as a democracy.

We want our international students to walk away with a better understanding of how the U.S. protects human rights, our freedom of the press and speech, how our legal system works, etc.”

Singaporean Engineer Chee Nam Chua teaches a fellow student, Boon Chua, to program a “quadrotor” unmanned aerial vehicle with a flight algorithm developed at the Naval Postgraduate School’s Autonomous Systems Engineering and Integration Laboratory.

the political spectrum. As a result, the U.S. government has had to adapt its programs for and with other nations to meet the new reality. “ The Wa r saw I n it iat ive Fu nd, allowing the old Warsaw Pact countries to transition into NATO, utilizes the same type of approaches to develop common practices. That has since expanded into South-Central Asia, to tie not only into the NATO structure but also coalitions,” McGaughey said.

“We also have a program for ministries of defense, which will be global next year, where an assessment team identifies which areas and nations need mentoring as they evolve their institutions and military capabilities.”

“Another program we watch over is the Defense Institute of International Legal Studies,” he said, “which provides the legal training required for conducting different programs in other nations; we assure they are compliant with and understand what is required of them as a nation as they grow on the world stage.

When we deal with them as part of a coalition operation, they have to adhere to certain requirements, as do we.”

How a nation and its personnel get on the list for the various programs DSCA handles might seem as simple as sending a request to the U.S. embassy – and, in some cases, it is. But for the majority, that is only the first step in a complex series of assessments involving the COCOM for that region – Europe (EUCOM), Africa (AFRICOM), Asia / Pacif ic (PACOM), Latin America (SOUTHCOM) and east/ south/central Asia (CENTCOM) – the Security Assistance office in the local U.S. Embassy, the State Department and local /regional government, and military officials. In some cases, the request begins with the COCOM or State.

“That has always been a hard thing, to define and measure effectiveness on paper. But I think in some respects the U.S. military gains as much, if not more, of a benefit than the international students in the classroom with them. The more nations we have

U.S Navy photo

sending students to the U.S., who gain a new perspective on how our military and nation work, the better – and I would say 99 percent of those new views are positive.”

“Typically, the request goes from the Security Cooperation Office [SCO] to the COCOM to State and DSCA or the various military departments, depending on the training involved.

Once funding is approved, the allocations are prioritized. Then they go through nominations, typically made at the cou ntr y level; the COCOMs usually get involved in the approval of personnel going to IMET-funded programs. They have the ability to look at all the information entered into the training database by the Security Cooperation Office. Then the vetting process begins,” McGaughey said.

“It is very important to work through [the requesting nation’s] established military structure and engage our Security Cooperation Office in that country. Individuals can self-nominate themselves to attend programs at regional centers, but the best way is to work through their existing defense ministries and our SCO.” Generally speaking, each COCOM knows how much money will be available for training initiatives for the coming year, including IMET, but the goal is to get allies trained to help meet U.S. military and foreign policy requirements, regardless of the source of funding. From the Cold War through the realignment decade after its end to even greater geopolitical and military changes in the opening years of the 21st century, the United States has

57

Armscor ammunition is the perfect balance of performance and value. Precision made and backed by a full warranty, military personnel and everyday shooters alike will find the right caliber for the right job. Grab a box for your pistol or rifle today and feel the difference.

rockislandarmory.com • armscorusa.com

Program Participant Post 9/11 GI Bill Yellow Ribbon Leverage your extensive information security operations knowledge to protect data, combat cyber-attacks, and prepare for the next generation of computer networks.

Penn State’s College of Information Sciences and Technology (IST) offers master of professional studies (MPS) degrees, delivered online and targeted for seasoned information technology professionals. Associate and bachelor degrees in IST also are available.

MPS in Information Sciences MPS in Enterprise Architecture MPS in Homeland Security: Information Security and Forensics option For more information: http://ist.psu.edu/online Penn State University is designated by the National Security Agency (NSA) as a “national center of academic excellence in information assurance education.”

Penn State is committed to affirmative action, equal opportunity, and the diversity of its workforce. U.Ed. IST12-18

repeatedly modified – and expanded – those training programs.

“In the 1990s, Congress realized there would be some changes needed, and said we could train some people outside the military or MoDs of some nations. It also expanded the kinds of training and courses DoD offered,” Judkins said. “A lot about resource management, civil/military relations, human rights and such were entwined in many DoD courses, but Congress wanted expanded courses dealing with those specific objectives. For years, we’ve had courses in sexual harassment, for example, but this year we’re developing some courses on the overall role of women in the military, which is a major focus of the Secretary of State.

“When it comes to NCOs, many former Soviet Bloc nations were not used to having [senior enlisted leaders], but because they liked the U.S. model, a lot of them are establishing NCOs. In some cases, it was easier for them to mold their militaries than in other nations, where you had to change the mindset of officers who may fear a functioning, professional NCO corps will take away their jobs. The IMET program has tried to look at it from an overall approach, from the ground up – changing a nation’s laws to allow the creation of an NCO corps, for example. But we still have nations that may have NCOs, but don’t use them the way the U.S. military does.”

How successful the various DSCAmanaged programs have been – and what results may be gained in the future – vary by nation, region, and perspective.

“That has always been a hard thing, to define and measure effectiveness on paper. But I think in some respects the U.S. military gains as much, if not more, of a benefit than the international students in the classroom with them,” she said. “The more nations we have sending students to the U.S., who gain a new perspective on how our military and nation work, the better – and I would say 99 percent of those new views are positive. Those officers then return home and tell their colleagues what they have learned. So that influence is a primary focus for IMET.” In Eastern Europe, McGaughey added, success also could be seen in the field, as former Soviet Bloc nations moved rapidly

to join their old enemies after the end of the Cold War, in structure and in combat.

“Some would say the success of mu ltiple cou ntries w ith in Eu rope joining NATO and their militaries then operati ng side by side from Desert Storm to current contingency operations would be one of the biggest successes,” he said. “A lot of that hinged on the levels of trust and relationships built from the early teams who went out to do individual soldier training and group and national exercises, from the tactical to the operational. The overall result is we have a NATO structure that is now able to execute coalition operations virtually seamlessly.”

Much of that experience was carried over to U.S. efforts in the Middle East and Southwest Asia. The next challenge, however, will require many new approaches.

“How DSCA looks at how we engage with African nations compared to former Warsaw Pact countries is a totally different paradigm. The old Soviet Bloc nations had mature governments and militaries, although they did need to make adjustments. In Africa, most of those institutions, all the way down the line, still have an immature status that requires us to adjust to a whole spectrum of issues, from the availability of the most basic life-support structures to the capacity of those governments to absorb not only training but new equipment,” McGaughey explained.

“It is very much a learning process with many of those countries. We are spending a lot of time dealing with issues on rule of law, human and arms trafficking, emerging democracies that want help, emerging militaries that need to educate not only their NCOs, but their command structure. So it is not only the military services dealing with Security Assistance, but other government institutional forces helping with border security and adapting to who and how we engage and assist in the changes those nations might want to achieve.”

The education and trai n i ng programs overseen by DSCA have a wide range of goals, both for the individuals and nations receiving them and U.S. political and military interests in those nations and regions. But one of the most important long-term results occurs at the personal level, with the

friendships and relationships developed among individuals going through the process together.

“During the Arab Spring, many former students who had maintained relationships provided unofficial information on what was occurring to former classmates, which allowed for a better understanding of not only the seriousness but the scope of those events. Over 100 former and current chiefs of defense and various senior leaders are alumni of these programs and have remained engaged with their former classmates,” McGaughey said.

“In some cases, the top leaders of countries are alumni, including both the King and Queen of Jordan, allowing for improved institutional relationships that have been key to providing contemporary insights into both national and regional issues. When AFRICOM stood up, Gen. [William] Ward used alumni from the Africa Center to help him understand issues within the continent, meeting with alumni in various countries, with the support of their governments. Those relationships and the trust that had been developed opened the door for him to deal with the initial issues involved with the stand-up of AFRICOM.” Such relationships are expected to become even more important in the decades to come, especially as new conflicts over resources, religion, and regional power further shift alliances and requirements.

“Just about anyone, U.S. and international, would say it has been extremely successful, including benefits for U.S. officers, who also can get a different perspective on those nations. The idea is to bring them together as allies in the classroom before they go out to the battlefield,” Judkins concluded.

“Because of the IMET program’s goals and objectives, we’re looking to change hearts and minds.

“I th in k that w i l l be even more important in the future. History shows the IMET program is very beneficial.

A nd even as other programs have been cut in the past, IMET usually has remained about the same. Several years ago, when Colin Powell was Secretary of State, Congress asked him if he had one more dollar in the Foreign Assistance Act, how would he spend it? His answer was IMET.” n

59

The Foreign Policy View Interview with Andrew J. Shapiro

Assistant Secretary, U.S. State Department Bureau of Political-Military Affairs

By eric tegler

A

mong the government entities with which the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) interacts, none has a broader view of policy than the State Department. The Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM) is the Department of State’s principal link to the Department of Defense (DoD). The PM Bureau provides policy direction in the areas of international security, security assistance, military operations, defense strategy and plans, and defense trade.

DSCA is State’s primary implementing agent, ensuring that the Foreign Military Sales (FMS), Security Assistance, and Security Cooperation approved by the department go forward in an efficient and timely manner. The policy guidance, approval, and authority of the State Department pass to DSCA through the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs, which is headed by Assistant Secretary Andrew J. Shapiro.

Shapiro was sworn in as Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs in June 2009. He previously served as senior adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Prior to joining the State Department with the secretary, he served from 2001 to 2009 as then-Sen. Clinton’s senior defense and foreign policy advisor. He also served as a member of the Obama-Biden Department of Defense Agency Review Team before shifting to Clinton’s confirmation and transition team once she was officially named.

Shapiro’s experience includes his role as counsel to the Justice Department’s

60

State Department is interacting with DSCA; from the action officer level to the front office level there are frequent interactions. We communicate constantly to make sure we’re able to provide support for our [security] partners.

Does DSCA distill policy guidance from State as it does from the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD)?

Under the Arms Export Control Act and the Foreign Assistance Act, the Secretary of State has oversight authority over arms sales and Security Assistance. We provide the State Department and foreign policy view on the impact of arms sales and security assistance.

International Competition Policy Advisory Committee and as an associate at the Washington, D.C. law firm Covington & Burling. A graduate of the University of Pennsylvania, he has a joint law/ master’s in international affairs degree from Columbia University, where he was a Harlan Fiske Stone Scholar.

Shapiro kindly took the time to discuss the role of the Bureau of PoliticalMilitary Affairs and how it interacts with DSCA daily.

Eric Tegler: What is the basic relationship of PM to DSCA? Assistant Secretary Andrew J. Shapiro: The Bureau of Political-Military Affairs has authority over arms sales as well as Security Assistance. DCSA is the implementing agent for the Secretary of State’s authority. On a daily basis, the

Does the PM Bureau periodically review U.S. agreements with our Security Cooperation partners? Does it recommend changes in relationships with specific partners or entities?

Yes, and it doesn’t just recommend changes. The Secretary carries authority so we provide guidance to DSCA and the Department of Defense on whether a Foreign Military Sale can go forward.

That requires constant communication on a daily basis on some of the most sensitive foreign policy issues of the day. The Arab awakening has presented a whole host of [Security Cooperation issues] that we’ve had to deal with. The “rebalancing” toward Asia means that we have to take new policy emphasis into account when we consider our Security Cooperation.

There’s a whole range of issues that we’re considering as events change around us.

U.S. Navy photo by Ensign Bill Morrison

What does the bureau weigh and then pass on to DSCA and OSD regarding technology transfer?

We’re always attempting to find the right technology transfer balance.

The government has a conventional arms transfer policy which we use to analyze all arms sales. It takes in many different factors, including technology, non-proliferation concerns, human rights, and regional stability concerns.

We consider all of those issues when deciding whether to approve an arms sale or to provide security assistance.

Does the transfer of Excess Defense Articles fall under the bureau’s purview?

Yes. The transfer of Excess Defense Articles has to be approved by the State Department and the authority to approve such transfer has been delegated by the secretary down to the Under Secretary [for Arms Control and International Security] and to me. We work very closely

with DSCA to identify which partners should be the recipients. There’s often a competition – whether it be for fighter aircraft or ships – for the most desirable defense articles, and that requires tough judgments about who would be best positioned to make use of them and how such transfers best serve our national security and policy interests.

How many people are in the bureau and how are their responsibilities generally divided?

There are about 300 people. Half are in the Directorate of Defense Trade Controls processing the licenses. There’s also a policy arm and an enforcement arm for those who violate the ITAR [International Traffic in Arms Regulations, part of the Arms Export Control Act]. We have a regional security office and an arms transfers office, which deals with DSCA most directly day to day. They deal with all FMS

Cmdr. Dennis Velez describes ship movement to Assistant Secretary of State Andrew J. Shapiro during his visit to the guided missile destroyer USS Fitzgerald.

[cases] around the world. And we have a policy and plans office which handles FMF [Foreign Military Financing] and Security Assistance issues.

There is also a small office dedicated to counterpiracy and one dedicated to congressional and public affairs. We have an office that handles international security operations, which often provides flight clearances for visiting officials. They have a 24/7 emergency center. We have a weapons removal and abatement office, which manages issues like clearing land mines and other explosive remnants of war as well as trying to mitigate the threat of shoulder-fired missiles called MANPADS.

61

Ruling the waves.

As a leading supplier of fully integrated communications systems, Rohde & Schwarz has provided more than 40 navies with the latest communications technology.

What exactly can we offer you? Everything you need to stay ahead in communications – from the analysis of operational requirements, system design and production up to system commissioning and lifetime support. And this applies to external and internal comms alike.

Our solutions are based on a common concept that is in service aboard all types of vessels, from small patrol vessels, mine hunters, corvettes and frigates up to aircraft carriers and landing platform docks (LPD, LSD).

Contact us for more information. We’ll get back to you immediately with convincing answers. www.rohde-schwarz.com/ad/navalcom

In addition, we have an office that negotiates status-of-forces agreements and defense cooperation agreements globally. It’s a pretty diverse portfolio.

How frequent is your interaction with the Secretary of State?

“She [Secretary Clinton] has a weekly meeting with the directorates at which I see her. Other weeks there will be meetings if a foreign defense minister is in town and wants to see her. I’ll often join her for that meeting or if she’s meeting with one of our combatant commanders. I typically travel with the Secretary a couple times a year, most recently to Tampa [Fla.] for a speech she was giving to SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command].

Part of what DSCA does is to interact with industry. What’s the role of the bureau, formal or informal, with respect to the defense-industrial establishment?

U.S. Embassy Jakarta photo by Erik Kurniawan/U.S. Government Work

Every license for direct commercial sale has to come through the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs for approval.

We processed 83,000 licenses last year.

So we work with the defense industry on a daily basis since they need our approval in order to export defense articles. We also hear from them as they are gathering information about potential FMS sales. Often if something has been approved by the Commerce Department for advocacy, we’ll advocate on behalf of U.S. companies when we’re interacting with our counterparts abroad.

Does the bureau factor the need to preserve America’s defense industrial base into its FMS and Security Cooperation approval/assessments?

Absolutely. We work very closely with DSCA on efforts to promote the sales of U.S. defense articles abroad where it has been determined that sales would support U.S. national security interests. I have been to several air shows which [DSCA director] Adm. [William E.] Landay has also attended.

Secretary Clinton has had a particular initiative to promote economic diplomacy, and as part of that effort the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs has been involved in encouraging our partners to build their relationships with us, growing our sales and Security Assistance. We cooperate hand in hand with DSCA in promoting that.

The cooperation is not solely related to sales, is it? For example, the Defense Institute of Secu r ity A ssistance Management (DISAM) and the Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (DIILS) engender opportunities to bring together foreign military and political officials and policy-makers for joint meetings and training. Would you argue that such opportunities amount to diplomacy in their own right?

Certainly. I actually gave a speech at the Center for [a New] American Security on just this point. The point that I always make when I discuss this is that arms sales are about more than buying a particular defense article or system. They’re about building a relationship. Given the complex nature of today’s defense systems, when a foreign buyer acquires a U.S. helicopter or airplane or ship, it’s just the beginning of a long-term relationship which requires training, maintenance, and discussions on how to effectively use the systems. The people using the systems are going to have to learn English.

Combined with the training, the sales reinforce the ties between the United States and our partners.

How does an FMS request typically progress? Does it start at State?

Typically, the local [U.S. Embassy] Office of Defense Cooperation or military attaché will work with the defense

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton holds a bilateral meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, in Bali, Indonesia, on July 22, 2011. Seated on the left side, left to right: U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, U.S. National Security Council Senior Director for Asian Affairs Daniel Russel, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for PoliticalMilitary Affairs Andrew J. Shapiro, and Lt. Gen. Paul Selva. Seated on the right side are: Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, interpreter Sun Ning, Chinese Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Liu Zhenmin, and Chinese Deputy Chief of Mission Xie Feng.

ministry and appropriate officials of the partner [country] to develop a Letter of Request. During the formation of that Letter of Request, the State Department will often be asked for our opinion on the items that a country is interested in acquiring because we don’t want to have a country submit a Letter of Request if we’re going to [summarily] deny it.

So there will be coordination in the development of the letter, and when it is submitted to the Department of Defense, it is then sent to the State Department for analysis by the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs as well as

63

the regional Bureau, and if there are proliferation concerns, other bureaus as well. Once an interagency consensus is reached that we are prepared to provide a letter of Acceptance, then we go back to the relevant country with that letter and the terms. Certain sales require congressional notification so we’re often unable to go forward with full negotiations until we’ve notified Congress that we’re planning on negotiating a security agreement. We work side by side with DSCA to brief Congress and relevant oversight committees to make sure they understand what we’re trying to accomplish.

How frequently do those congressional briefings go forward?

Photo courtesy of U.S. Embassy, Djibouti

They’re usually done every couple weeks.

What sorts of periodic meetings do you have with DSCA and other agencies?

We have Security Cooperation roundtables at the State Department to which OSD and DSCA will send representatives to discuss what our Security Cooperation priorities should be, particularly for Security Assistance in the coming year.

There are also a number of DoD panels on which the State Department is represented, which meet regularly.

Are there policy issues that require departures from established procedure that you hammer out with other agencies like DSCA? There’s always room for improvement. The Iraq experience demonstrated some deficiencies in the way we provide defense articles, which the Pentagon has been trying to improve, and we have been supporting that process as well.

What sort of travel does your role take you on and what does it usually entail?

In the past year-and-a-half I’ve been to four air shows including Aero India, the Singapore Airshow, Dubai Airshow, and the Paris Air Show. I’ve also traveled numerous times to the Middle East and Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Europe.

Often when I travel, I’m seeing both representatives from foreign ministries and defense ministries, giving them equal access to the authority that the Secretary of State has in approving arms transfers.

I was just in Vietnam, where we had a security dialogue with representatives from their foreign ministry, defense ministry, and interior ministry. They were all sitting at the same table across from our representatives from the State and Defense departments. My travel is usually designed to promote Security Cooperation and to address the concerns of our partners while building closer ties.

Members of the U.S. Embassy’s Office of Security Cooperation deliver medical supplies to the Djibouti Armed Forces military training center at Holhol, Djibouti, Oct. 3, 2011. The approximately 200 pounds of medical supplies were donated by U.S. Africa Command.

With whom do you liaise at U.S. embassies abroad?

It depends. I’ll often deal directly with the ambassador or the deputy chief of mission.

At larger embassies, they’ll have a politicalmilitary affairs officer who handles our types of issues, from arms sales to weapons removal and abatement to proliferation issues. I work with the senior defense official in each embassy as well.

Such travel must also be valuable for collecting information and getting the pulse of particular Security Cooperation relationships. Do you debrief these trips upon returning or send back information while abroad?

Of course. Part of being a diplomat is ability to listen. We go abroad to hear what our partners have to say and bring that back to our government to address whatever concerns are raised. There’s constant coordination between the State and Defense departments on what we’re hearing and how we can respond. n

65

Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief, and Mine Action

By J.R. Wilson

T

he U.S. military typically is seen as the world’s most powerful war machine, a force deployed to destroy the nation’s enemies when combat is required or provide a sufficiently overwhelming display of force capability to curtail acts of war by most potential aggressors.

However, there is another side to America’s defense establishment, one that has grown larger in scope and as a part of U.S. military and foreign policy in recent years: Humanitarian Assistance, Disaster Relief & Mine Action (HDM).

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) supports the geographic combatant commands (COCOMs) by providing the funding to execute command-specific Humanitarian Assistance and Humanitarian Mine Action programs, while maintaining oversight of the overarching Department of Defense (DoD) program. The armed services provide execution and project management to the COCOMs, and the COCOMs provide strategy and resources.

HDM, as a security cooperation tool, is a blend of international assistance to nations with both urgent and long-term needs, and a positive way to improve relations with other governments, build partner capacity to provide essential services to their populations, and enhance global public perceptions of America.

“We essentially try to alleviate human suffering with the provision of humanitarian aid for basic survival and a basic infrastructure for its continuation,” Diane C. Halvorsen, DSCA’s HDM division chief, explained. “We do a lot of construction – schools, health clinics, hospitals, sanitation, from latrines to community sewer systems, in accordance with the local standards of that nation.”

“Because th is comes from DoD rather than USAID [U.S. Agency for

66

International Development], it is for access and influence and visibility, not development, often in nations where we have no other DoD programs. So it creates good will, promotes interoperability and coalition building, improves the basic living conditions of the indigenous population, and enhances the host government through training and to build security and stability.”

HDM is divided into three primary focuses: • Humanitarian Assistance (HA) in the wake of long-term natural calamities, such as famine or drought, to assist refugees from war and to improve basic living conditions; • Disaster Relief (DR), such as that provided to Haiti following devastating earthquakes there, or the Japanese and Indonesian tsunamis; and • Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA), which trains others in the safe detection and disposal of land mines and other explosive remnants of war (ERW), and management of potentially dangerous stockpiled explosive ordnance, some dating back to World War II. HDM also works with host nations on disaster preparedness, such as the construction of cyclone shelters in Bangladesh (which also were designed to double as schools).

“There are four sectors into which projects fall within the steady state Humanitarian Assistance program – disaster preparedness, basic infrastructure support, health support, and educational support. All projects must be coordinated with the [U.S.] country team at the embassy level and with USAID and State or they will not be approved at the DSCA level,” Halvorsen said. “Steady-state, everyday efforts, where the COCOMs are our customers, are the preponderance of our effort.

That includes training, both national

and regional; establishing warehouses stocked with disaster materials; and teaching [locals] how to manage those.”

“Humanitarian Assistance involves everyday things that are not urgent; disaster preparedness is getting ready for something that may happen; Disaster Relief is responding to an event, either natural or man-made – most are natural.

The Japan tsunami also had a nuclear element, where we funded the consequence management piece; so with that response, we had three different policy offices involved – consequence management, regional, and SOLIC [Special Operations & Low Intensity Conflict].”

Standing, as Halvorsen describes it, “between the policy and COCOM levels, policy and execution,” DSCA administers the Overseas Humanitarian Disaster And Civic Aid (OHDACA) appropriation.

DSCA oversees the allocation of the OHDACA appropriation to the geographic combatant commands and ensures policy compliance of OHDACA funded activities.

“Our division works with the COCOMs, who identify the strategies, which partners they want to engage and how they want to engage,” HDM Management and Program Analyst Ramon Davis said. “We maintain funding here for when State requests assistance for responding to disasters overseas. We follow the lead of the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Partnership Strategy and Stability Operations and other Policy offices, working with USAID, State, the Joint Staff, and COCOMs to provide funding and support.”

Those groups also stand as a buffer between DSCA and foreign governments, especially their militaries.

“With the possible exception of HMA, we generally don’t deal with militaries; unlike FMS [Foreign Military Sales], we are not supposed to benefit another nation’s military. We deal with the

photo by Lance Cpl Jhonson Simeon

civilians,” Halvorsen said. “We can provide assistance to the military when the ultimate beneficiaries are the civilian populace, for example, where the [local] military is the first responder, which is common in Africa, or the only hospital within 500 miles is run by the military.”

With Humanitarian Assistance, much of DSCA’s efforts emphasize support for education, such as the construction or rehabilitation of schools and support of national education initiatives. The approach is similar for health clinics in areas with little or no local medical care. HA also often acts as a precursor to disaster relief.

“Prom i nent now, f rom a pol icy perspective, is disaster planning and preparedness,” Davis noted. “AFRICOM [African Command] is looking at helping partner nations with a full review of their disaster planning and preparedness programs and how the U.S. can further assist in capacity building.”

Every HDM effort essentially is a complex balancing act, coordinating with all stakeholders to ensure every action is in accordance with and supports U.S. foreign policy and national security goals.

“With the Philippines, for example, the ambassador has regular meetings with all players and knows what activities are ongoing or predicted. In other locations, where the team does not get together that often, some State entity usually is designated as leader and informed of DoD intentions to conduct humanitarian activities,” Halvorsen said.

“We don’t blindside the ambassador, who always has to know what is going on in that country. Sometimes DoD may provide assistance USAID does not support, but the ambassador is always informed. That may include a situation where the opposition is providing aid faster and more prevalently than DoD.” Another major group in almost every international relief effort with which DSCA typically does not interact directly is nongovernmental organizations.

“That generally is handled by USAID, which has long-standing relationships and grants provided to [non-governmental organization] NGOs. Those often are the Red Cross and similar agencies, already on the ground and familiar with the local population and how things work,” Halvorsen said. “In fact, because

Pakistan army soldiers maintain security and assist U.S. Marines of Marine Medium Tilt Rotor Squadron 266 Reinforced (VMM266 REIN), 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit (26th MEU), with unloading food from a CH-53E Super Stallion helicopter in the Sindh province, Pakistan, during flood relief operations, Oct.15, 2010.

we are the military, there are some NGOs who won’t deal with us.”

The procedures are similar, but on a much faster track, with regard to disaster relief.

“When a disaster occurs, communication within DoD and the interagency community begins almost immediately to ensure the sharing of information and that all have a common understanding of the situation. We begin discussion in the interagency community, DoD and State, to ensure sharing of information, as recently in providing shelters and medevac support after a major earthquake in Turkey, a snow disaster in Montenegro, and flooding in Thailand,” Davis said. “Depending on the scale of the event, immediate action

67

12-0003-MD-Defense-HalfPageAd.indd 1

4/24/12 6:44 PM

U.S. Air Force photo by Staff Sgt. R.J. Biermann

may be required, so good communication between all stakeholders allows us to be prepared to respond as quickly as possible when called upon to do so. We may also respond in complex emergencies, such as the revolution in Libya, where DOS [Department of State] asked us to provide transportation in support of evacuation operations.”

All requests for help, typically based on a disaster declaration by the local U.S. ambassador, are validated by USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA). Interagency discussions determine what approach to take, then State makes a formal request for DoD support.

“If DoD support is authorized by the Secretary of Defense, HDM works with the combatant command to ensure it is properly resourced to execute authorized foreign disaster relief support activities and to ensure that such activities are in accordance with guidance and authorities,” Davis said.

DoD’s pr i ma r y role i n d isaster response is to provide “lift” – moving people and goods – although each disaster is unique and drives different sets of requirements.

“We sometimes provide tents and such from our excess property warehouses, but we try to avoid that unless there is an official request. If you aren’t careful, you can flood a country with stuff they don’t need or can’t distribute,” Halvorsen said.

“Typically, the HA office within the COCOM will be responsible for such requests, but it varies from commander to commander; some may be extremely, directly involved, others are more hands-off.”

“In PACOM [Pacific Command], for instance, it is less the HA office and more J5, which deals with policy, supported by the HA office. In EUCOM [European Command], which doesn’t have that many disasters, it varies; sometimes it’s J4 [Logistics], more often J3 [Operations].

However, if a COCOM does not coordinate with their HA office, it can be a problem for us, because the operators are not really trained in these areas and what may seem like a good idea – such as providing bottled water – may not work well and could actually have a negative effect. That is why we work with USAID/ OFDA, who are far more experienced in the business of disaster relief.”

“Sometimes DoD will provide security services, as we did in Haiti, protecting

the camps of internally displaced persons, but that doesn’t happen very often. Probably 98 percent of the time, any form of Humanitarian Assistance we provide is in a non-risk environment; that also is true of Disaster Relief,” Halvorsen said. “In most places, that is not an issue, but it varies.”

“When the Pakistan flooding occurred, it was a very deliberate response, very sensitive to the situation there. We wanted to make sure our footprint was very small, that we were supporting the Pakistani military and they were out front at all times, with our support as much behind the scenes as possible.”

To the extent possible, HDM-related activities rely on local hires and resources, overseen by DoD personnel, who may be uniformed or civilian, depending on the situation. DSCA also has an evolving approach to ensuring the security and proper use of relief supplies.

“We use an established supply chain, so everything stays in the hands of USAID or NGOs until distributed to individuals. If it is setting on a tarmac or dock, there usually is someone, often from the UN, who will protect it. But having relief supplies stolen is extremely rare,” she noted – rare, but not impossible.

“When we first went into Afghanistan and airdropped HDRs [humanitarian daily rations] – which was a learning experience – we discovered them on the black market and, in some cases, feeding the Taliban. That’s not something we would care to repeat. We’re working with the Air Force, which initiated it, on different packaging and delivery

Petty Officer 3rd Class Ryan Donofrio, assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Mobile Unit 11 (EODMU-11), and Kenyan Army Lance Cpl. Tajeu Olomunyak, EOD trainee, practice proper explosive disposal at the Kenyan Ministry of Defense Stony-Athi Range outside Nairobi during a three-week Humanitarian Mine Action program.

mechanisms for HDRs in high-risk environments.”

DSCA stocks, maintains, and refurbishes humanitarian material from its nonlethal Excess Property Program, managed by HDM. The Excess Property Program materials, which include medical equipment, school supplies, furniture, and relief supplies such as blankets, are kept in three primary warehouses of relief supplies located in Italy, on the Japanese island of Okinawa, and at the Marine Corps logistics base in Albany, Ga. As property is declared excess within DoD and turned in to DLA Disposition Services, DSCA staff identify needed articles and work to harvest nonlethal excess property that could be used for humanitarian purposes, both steady state and in response to disasters.

“Our folks constantly screen the system to see what’s out there, and we are close to the top of the list of who gets first dibs. We can pay for transportation, refurbishment, calibration, maintenance, etc., unlike EDA [Excess Defense Articles], which are ‘as is/where is.’

You can’t send an incubator to Ecuador that might or might not work,” she said.

69

usmc photo by Sgt. Matt Lyman

“We try to acquire as many tents and blankets as possible, because those are heavily used in disaster scenarios, and also stock HDRs in a climate-controlled area in the Albany warehouse.”

While Humanitarian Mine Action (HMA) takes a significantly different path of assistance – “train the trainer” – interagency coordination remains a primary component.

“We do not go i nto a ny nat ion regarding mine action without first working with State and the COCOMs, so it is very much a whole-of-government approach. As of this year, for example, every COCOM has an HMA representative on staff,” Halvorsen said. “But U.S. forces are not allowed to actually remove land mines or other munitions – we can train locals, but the authority specifically says we will not act directly.”

“The State Department Weapons Removal and Abatement Office engages with nations on a diplomatic level regarding what their needs are, from assessments to how we can best support them. They also fund contractors who go in to physically remove land mines and such, even while we are training locals how to continue that. Each organization has a different purpose, but when you put them together, with State in the lead, you have a full package of support.”

DSCA’s HMA focus is on training foreign personnel how to detect, deactivate and remove all types of unexploded – but still lethal – ERW. That begins with the Humanitarian Demining Training Center (HDTC) at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., established in 1996 and transferred to DSCA in 2003. Classified as a DoD Center of Excellence, it also trains U.S. special operations forces, explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) and other military personnel who may encounter or are tasked with dealing with ERW in theater.

Some of those, along with HDTC instructors, will help train host nation personnel in country. Other foreign students will go to Fort Leonard Wood for training in mine clearance operations, mine awareness education and information campaigns, assistance in the establishment of mine action centers, emergency med ical care and the leadership and management skills needed to successfully conduct a national-level mine action program.

DoD estimates more than 1 million ERW remain a threat in at least 60 nations and kill or maim thousands – including children – every year. HDTC’s mission is to develop a self-sustaining, indigenous demining capability within each recipient country, “So that others may walk the Earth in safety.” “[HMA] went almost dormant for several years following 9/11, but began to be resurrected about four years ago as more U.S. forces became available and stability operations were elevated to the same level as combat operations,” Halvorsen said. “Humanitarian Assistance has been slowly rising in terms of priority, becoming a more important tool in the COCOM’s toolkit. We’re looking especially to increased actions in places like Asia/ Pacific; it makes sense for us, at the country’s request, to go in and help clean up something we may have caused.”

Overall, the program management activities over which HDM presides are a prime example of what former Defense Secretary Robert Gates called “soft power,” Halvorsen said, where relatively inexpensive projects (as little as a few thousand dollars) provide a positive U.S. presence. That is true even with a nation that has been sanctioned and almost all programs except Humanitarian Assistance have been stopped or curtailed.

“It’s part of a huge cultural change within DoD, where the benefits of education and collaboration and partnerships are growing in importance. And that’s what we do with HDM, where $107 million a year is not a big investment of taxpayer dollars relative to other DoD programs, but helps us maintain a global presence,” she concluded. “If we can use

Marines, airmen, and Norwegian soldiers in Trondheim, Norway, work around the clock to load emergency equipment onto a U.S. C-17 Air Force Globemaster III aircraft to ship to eastern Turkey in response to a 7.2-magnitude earthquake that left thousands homeless. Marines assigned to U.S. Marine Corps Forces Europe, along with airmen with the 62nd Airlift Wing based out of JointBase Louis-McChord, Wash., and Norwegian soldiers assembled 16 pallets loaded with 369 arctic tents, 369 space heaters, and 369 fuel cans – totaling more than 91,000 pounds – Oct. 31, 2011.

low-cost, non-threatening programs to help stabilize areas that have become susceptible to influences from our enemies, we might save ourselves from future problems and money and lives expended because we were not paying attention or engaging on another level.

“This is a cultural change, and there is a lot here people don’t know about or understand. We are trying hard to develop a robust training program where we can reach deploying personnel, military department civilians, ideally the academies and schoolhouses, State Department, USAID, and others. We’re working with the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, as well as interagency counterparts, but there are still a lot of people we haven’t reached. Part of that is not having enough staff at the moment, but the sooner we get the word out, the sooner we will all benefit from these programs.” n

71

U.S. Army and Air Force Secretariats Lead Sales, Security, and Technology Transfer By eric tegler

W

hile the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) is the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) focal point for all forms of international Security Cooperation, from Security Assistance to Foreign Military Sales (FMS), the agency and the Pentagon need organizations within the armed services to implement policy and facilitate transfers.

That’s where the service secretariats come in.

Along with their respective service component commands, the Army’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Exports and Cooperation (DASA [DE&C]) and the Deputy Under Secretary of the Air Force, International Affairs (SAF/ IA) facilitate exports, issue guidance, delegate responsibility, and manage technology transfers. DSCA funds the secretariats and issues policy guidance.

For the Army, the hierarchy starts with the Secretary of the Army and flows down to the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE). AAE oversees DE&C, which then delegates responsibility for individual programs to other Army components.

“In that sense, we’re similar to the Air Force and Navy,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Exports and Cooperation Keith Webster. “Where

72

the Air Force has AFSAC [Air Force Security Assistance and Cooperation Directorate], I have USASAC [U.S. Army Security Assistance Command], which is under Army Materiel Command.”

In simple terms, the deputy assistant secretary said, “We [DE&C] work to ensure that the Army Chief of Staff and the Secretary of the Army have a full international picture.”

Webster has more than 27 years of federal service under his belt, starting in 1985 as an intern with the Army Materiel Command. Thereafter he moved on to assignments at the Army Acquisition Executive, then to DSCA forerunner DSAA (Defense Security Assistance Agency). There, he undertook six different assignments over 14 years before taking the reins at DE&C in January 2007.

As the deputy assistant secretary, he oversees a staff of 73 mostly civilian members with funding from Army Resea rch Development, Test a nd Evaluation, and OA-22 (Army Resource Management). In fiscal year 2011, DE&C managed a portfolio including $121 billion in FMS sales. Of that total, approximately $57 billion was delivered goods and services, $51 billion was yetto-be delivered, and the balance of $13 billion represented new sales.

There is a bit more centralization of management and policy in DE&C than in its service counterparts, Webster acknowledged. He boils down DE&C missions into three areas, the first of which is export policy. Export policy guidance from DSCA is interpreted by DE&C and put into “Army terms.”

“It’s my responsibility to take the policy guidance they disseminate and, if need be, add an Army clarification to it. If I don’t believe something is executable or manageable, I will engage with DSCA either to clarify or to modify.”

For example, DE&C may add modifications to export policy for the CH-47 Chinook helicopter to reflect the shift from the current CH-47D to the new CH-47F model. Such documents are coordinated at the three-star level before being issued. DE&C also publishes classified documents disseminated within the Army that identify critical technologies, specifying how they are protected, and describing how transfers (commercial sales or FMS) may be managed.

Transfer is the second mission area.

Commercial sales (private industry to foreign customers) are granted by license and the armed services are granted one vote on each license application that comes through the Defense Technology Security Administration.

Boeing photo

The first Canadian CH-147F mediumto-heavy lift helicopter during its first flight in June 2012. Canada is buying at least 15 CH-47F Chinooks, designated CH-147F in Canadian service.

Accelerated delivery of Chinooks to Canadian forces is one of the Army Acquisition Executive’s success stories.

DE&C votes on more than 7,000 commercial licenses a year. Based upon its policy guidance, the secretariat will sometimes deny a commercial sale, recommending it go through another channel as a government-to-government FMS sale, for example.

Traditional Secu rity A ssistance programs are within DE&C’s purview as well as Security Cooperation (Title 10 Train and Equip authority) programs.

Also managed by DSCA, these Security Cooperation programs are centered largely on A fghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan. Nearly all of them go through DE&C, representing a large share of the secretariat’s workload.

“That really is a constant challenge [monitored at] a four-star level in the Army,” Webster said. “It’s critical to our exit from those theaters. Beyond that, the challenges are future programs that are running the risk of going off track.”

Armaments cooperation is the third DE&C mission area. Here, the secretariat facilitates international collaboration at the scientific research, development, technology, and evaluation level. Working under the Office of the Secretary of Defense (through the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics), DE&C supports Army research labs on the many projects they engage in with U.S. security partners.

“I have the authority to negotiate and conclude bilateral/multilateral agreements on behalf of the Secretary of Defense,” Webster explained. “Such agreements legally allow sharing of information and data in projects at the research level.”

Concluding such agreements is a tangible sign of DE&C’s work. Despite its considerable FMS sales number, Webster said the secretariat’s chief

metric of success is largely its support to the U.S. warfighter and to those of America’s security partners.

“Whether we sell $12 billion a year or $5 billion is not a number that I focus on. What I do fixate on is how quickly we’re able to turn a letter of request into a signed letter of offer and acceptance.”

DE&C manages two aspects of support activity every day, its senior executive explained. One is the current fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Pakistan, where supporting coalition partners is paramount.

“We’ve done a lot for Australian, Canadian, Singaporean, and French soldiers. We’re always asking, ‘What is the requirement and how fast are we moving to get [the warfighter] a capability?’”

The second support activity centers on the future f ight, ensuring that America’s allies can participate in shouldering the global security burden.

“That’s providing capability to partners so that they’re prepared down the road.

That might be providing AH-64 Apache helicopters for Taiwan, various aviation platforms for Saudi Arabia,” Webster said.

73

FMS and armaments cooperation are not only important in terms of sharing security responsibilities with U.S. partners.

They can be vital in maintaining America’s defense industrial base, a resource that DE&C monitors and seeks to support.

“The exercise we’re going through right now [managing a declining defense budget while striving to preserve capability] I lived through on the Army staff in 1990-92,” Webster said.

“We helped with the international strategy, selling the Abrams M1A1/2 tank to Saudi Arabia and Egypt. We needed to get the A2 into production to save the tank plant in Ohio. Sound familiar? We saved the workforce so that in 1994 the Army could ride in with [a refreshed budget] and buy the A2s. To be effective as we were in 1990, we’re beginning a dialogue with our PEOs to understand what they believe their [sustainment] challenges are and where they believe there may be some international opportunities.”

Communication with Army program managers is particularly important for DE&C in an era where budget cuts may affect programs it works to facilitate.

“I think we’re all trying to come to terms with where the domestic acquisition programs are going. Until sequestration is addressed we won’t have a full picture. The last thing we want to do is start advocating a program [for FMS or Security Assistance] that the Army may be forced to drop in two years. That doesn’t help our allies.”

Regardless of the uncertainty, DE&C continues to implement transfers and finetune policy relevant to Army international security programs.

“What drives me is understanding how we’re supporting a partner government in attaining a capability so that they’re prepared consistent with Army desires,” Webster said.

The same commitment to ensuring U.S. security partners are prepared propels SAF/IA Heidi Grant.

“Regardless of budget shortages or surpluses,” Grant said, “we want better equipped, better trained, trusted partners around the globe who can help prevent conflicts.”

Grant came to SAF/IA in 2010 with a wide range of experience in budget policy and international f inancial management, including 13 years with the Navy Comptroller, Joint Chiefs of

Staff, and Office of the Under Secretary of Defense. In 2002, she was assigned as Director for Resources and Analysis (J-8) at Headquarters, U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), where she spent the bulk of her tour at CENTCOM’s Forward Headquarters in Southwest Asia. Grant worked with senior military representatives from 65 countries in leading the combatant command’s resource strategy and analysis for Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom.

Fo l l o w i n g h e r a s s i g n m e nt i n Southwest Asia, she became director of resources during the stand-up of the newest regional command – Headquarters U.S. Africa Command located in Stuttgart, Germany.

Like DE&C, SAF/IA works closely with DSCA as the Department of the Air Force lead representative with U.S. security partner air forces. The secretariat provides direction to the Air Force executing agencies and departments, and facilitates coordination for Air Force FMS cases/initiatives. Formally and philosophically, SAF/IA’s mission is to enable conflict prevention and joint/ coalition operational success. Building trust with existing and new partners is an ongoing process that has many facets, according to Grant.

“The scope of what we do is really anything as far as air force-to-air force international engagement, air/space or cyber warfare is concerned. The Foreign

A Saudi Arabian Abrams undergoes refurbishment in the United States.

Sales of the M1A1/A2 Abrams to Saudi Arabia helped keep the tank plant in Lima, Ohio, in operation in between U.S. government orders.

Military Sales and partner capability building activities are what many people are familiar with. But our activity runs the gamut, from training our own airmen to take international [Security Cooperation] positions to the selection of air attachés who work at our embassies. We also train foreign partner airmen as pilots, maintainers, and logisticians, assign [student] slots for our Air War College and other professional education opportunities. And we advise the Secretary of the Air Force and Air Force Chief of Staff on politicomilitary affairs, international travel, and engagement. It’s a broad scope of activity.”

The secretariat is organized into three subordinate directorates: Regional Affairs, led by Brig. Gen. Mark C. Dillon, is organized along geographic combatant command lines and works directly in support of the COCOMs, helping meet the objectives they identify and facilitating security partner requests that come through these commands. The directorate also has a Weapons Division, which is Grant’s primary interface with industry, providing a direct channel to the makers of any Air Force platform.

75

The Policy Directorate formulates, refines, and executes international affairs policy guidance across competencies, from training to armaments cooperation and export control. The third directorate – Strategy, Operations and Resources – focuses on long-term partnership building and works to secure the budget support to implement that strategy. Grant has placed considerable emphasis on crafting a global partnership strategy through this directorate, spurred by experiences like the Air Force’s engagement in Operation Unified Protector in Libya.

“In the Libyan operation, what jumped out at us strategically was that the U.S provided about 80 percent of ISR [intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance] capability and 70 percent of air refueling. In the next five to 10 years, which countries could we be looking to grow that capability with in order to increase burden sharing?”

SAF/IA consists of approximately 170 staff, including active-duty, Reserve, civilian, and contractor personnel.

Nearly all have bachelor’s degrees, three-quarters have an advanced degree, more than 50 percent have

76

language skills and almost two-thirds have in-country experience.

The trust they build with U.S. international security partners improves not only multilateral capability and readiness, Grant asserted, but has also paved the way for unprecedented joint weapons acquisition programs.

“The F-35 program is historic,” she said. “Typically, the U.S. has had a proven system which it has sold to other countries. With the JSF [Joint Strike Fighter], we’re selling equipment to our partners at the same time we’re [developing] it ourselves. The trust that’s going on, air force to air force, is really important.”

“Looking at the amount of money we spent to participate in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and their aftermath has given me the drive to work to avoid conflict. That’s the best position we can be in – working with our partners to build capability, capacity, and trust.”

Lockheed Martin photo

The first flight of the first British F-35, F-35B airframe BH-1. The JSF program is notable for having international partners even in the development stages of the program.

As with DE&C, SAF/IA devotes energy to clarifying policy guidance from DSCA, the State Department, and others for its Air Force partners, like AFSAC and the Air Force Security Assistance Training Squadron (AFSAT), which execute and manage the many FMS/Security Assistance cases.

Grant said the secretariat’s success is measured in terms of cost-effective coalition warfighter capability and the conflicts that readiness prevents.

“My operational financial management experience has really given me a passion for this position,” Grant said.

“Looking at the amount of money we spent to participate in the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and their aftermath has given me the drive to work to avoid conflict. That’s the best position we can be in – working with our partners to build capability, capacity, and trust.”

As an example, Grant pointed to the 2007 launch of the first Wideband Global Satcom (satellite communications) satellite, which upgraded U.S. communications capacity by a factor of 10. The Air Force and SAF/IA realized that security partners’ demand for SATCOM would increase as well, so they looked to develop partnerships to increase capacity while decreasing cost. As a result, Australia entered into an agreement with the United States that allowed a sixth satellite to be added to the constellation, increasing the overall capacity of the system. Thereafter, Canada, Luxembourg, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Denmark joined the partnership, further increasing funding and capacity through the launch of a ninth satellite.

u.s. air force photo

Royal Saudi Air Force (RSAF) Staff Sgt. Hassan, crew chief, waits to marshal an RSAF F-15 Strike Eagle before a training mission during Red Flag 12-2, Jan. 25, 2012, at Nellis Air Force Base, Nev.

SAF/IA’s support to warfighters was reflected around the globe in 2011, including in Libya, where it worked with AFSAC to meet COCOM prioritized requirements for U.S. coalition partners, particularly with munitions support.

But Grant pointed out that work done

by SAF/IA facilitating the commercial sale and FMS maintenance/training/ logistical support of Block 60 F-16s to the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in the late 1990s paid dividends in Operation Unified Protector. In the years since, UAE developed the capability and interoperability acumen to participate through Air Force training and exercises.

“It was a great success story,” Grant said. “UAE is now a recognized fully

capable partner that has proven its ability to operate alongside NATO countries.

More importantly, the U.S. was able to focus its efforts elsewhere because of the support of multiple countries like UAE.” As SAF/IA, Grant has sought to draw attention to the fact that many of the extant policies and laws in the Security Cooperation enterprise were written years ago. Along with foreign customers, the secretariats like SAF/IA can highlight changes that need to be made.

Change has already come through DSCA leadership, she maintained.

“Under DSCA’s lead a lot of great changes have been made recently. For example, in FMS cases over $9 billion, DSCA has come up with an innovative ‘tiered admin fee.’”

The fee innovation was sparked by the sale of F-15s to Saudi Arabia, the largest case in U.S. history, Grant explained.

More recently it helped clinch the sale of F-16s to Iraq, which could not afford the $3 billion purchase in one year.

“Working with DSCA we were able to split that case into three letters of acceptance to make it financially affordable for Iraq. There are many innovative tools and financing opportunities that are in our mutual security interest.”

SAF/IA’s communication and partnerships with DSCA, the Air Force, and other agencies within the U.S. government are better than ever, Grant said.

Teaming with the State Department, the Department of Commerce, and Congress is essential, she said. The collaboration between government and industry is likewise better than ever. The payoff is better mutual security and enhanced ability to respond to crises.

“Everything we’re doing is about conflict prevention and interoperability if the need to respond arises. That’s our No. 1 priority. We can’t afford not to partner. As defense budgets decline, I think this needs to be one of our main focus areas. It doesn’t cost much and it prevents future costs.” n

77

The ABCs of Security Cooperation: DISAM and DIILS

By Jan tegler

T

he heart of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency’s (DSCA’s) mission – building the skills and capacity of America’s international partners to improve their security, and in turn our own – depends on the expertise and institutional knowledge of a well-informed Security Cooperation community in the continental United States (CONUS) and overseas.

The Defense Institute of Security Assistance Management (DISAM) and the Defense Institute of International Legal Studies (DIILS) are DSCA’s global educators, providing instruction, guidance, and mentoring in the many practical and legal facets of Security Cooperation.

In a nutshell, the two organizations teach and disseminate the ABCs of Security Cooperation. To better understand how they function within DSCA, we spoke with the principals of both organizations.

DISAM “We are the Security Cooperation education and training arm of DSCA,” Ronald H. Reynolds, Ph.D., explained.

Reynolds has been DISAM’s commandant for more than a decade, leading the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (WPAFB)-based organization through a period during which it has grown significantly, expanding its offering of courses designed to train the Security Cooperation workforce in the classroom and online, whether in the United States or overseas.

Growth has been particularly strong over the last two years. In response to the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) “Top Ten” initiative, DISAM is working to ensure that 95 percent of the Security Cooperation workforce has current training. Given the current size and scope of the Security Cooperation community,

78

providing education and training in a timely fashion is a challenging proposition.

“It’s a larger core community now than was expected,” Reynolds acknowledged. “I don’t think anyone at DSCA ever thought we’d have 10,500 people in a database.

DISAM has been around for 35 years and in that period of time we’ve educated over 100,000 students. But in the last two years, between 2010 and 2011, we trained over 24,000 of that 100,000.”

In fact, the Security Cooperation community has grown beyond the number referred to above, said Reynolds.

“It’s larger than that, actual ly, because the people taking our online familiarization course are not in the Security Cooperation Workforce Database [SCWD]. We’re reaching out beyond the core workforce to those on the periphery of Security Assistance.

It’s a broad constituency.”

At its core, DISAM’s constituency i ncludes u n i for med a nd civ i l ia n Sec u r it y C o op erat ion work forc e members serving with DoD, the U.S Department of State, the Department of Commerce, and the Department of Homeland Security. But students also come from international partner countries receiving Security Assistance and members of private industry.

“Generally, our students come from key constituent organizations who are already using us and have been for a long time,” Reynolds noted. “The SCWD makes it simple for our constituents because it delineates the course work [online or resident] needed for an individual who may need DISAM training for a given position. In many cases that’s just an online course. Others come in and register on our website and we go back to their supervisor after reviewing their position description to verify that they have a requirement for a particular course.”

Quotas for students from DISAM’s different constituencies are set for selected courses. Representatives for each agency monitor the quotas to assign students as needed.

“We have quotas for many of our classes,” Reynolds said. “For example, each of the armed services may get eight slots out of 30 students. DISAM uses it as a tool to see who’s out there and how many people may need our course offerings. Our constituent organizations may have one person leaving a position; when their replacement arrives they can plug that person’s name into the database and know if they need a particular course based on the requirement for that position. Likewise, if a person arrived in a new position having already completed the required courses, the SCWD will show that they’ve already received the DISAM training they need.”

DISAM’s large menu of courses is broken into Resident Courses conducted at WPAFB, and Online Learning, which can be done remotely.

Resident Courses are organized into four groups: U.S. Government CONUS; U.S. Government OCONUS (outside the continental United States); International Purchaser; and Industry. Course lengths vary from two days to three weeks and most classes are offered a number of times annually. Designed for the organization’s broad constituency, the courses are tailored to meet student-specific needs at all levels of Security Assistance management. Content is a blend of instruction on the governing policies concerning Security Assistance, implementation and execution by various government agencies, and associated management processes.

O n l i ne L ea r n i ng, prov ided by DISAM’s Distance Learning Directorate, includes courses in International Programs Security Requirements;

U.S. Army photo by Sgt. 1st Class Maureen Simpkins

Missile Technology Control Regime; Security Assistance Manager/Training Manager Course Prerequisite; Security Cooperation Management Logistics Support Refresher Course; and the Security Cooperation Management Online Orientation Course.

Some DISAM courses are “hybrid” offerings, including the institute’s cornerstone offering for those assigned w ithin the United States working international programs in Security Cooperation. The class features a week’s worth of online instruction and one week of class in-residence at WPAFB. Security Cooperation Officers (SCOs) are the DISAM constituents at the “tip of the spear” figuratively speaking.

“They’re heading overseas to advise other governments, whether they’re a big ally like the U.K. or a small one such as Botswana where we maybe have only two people,” said Reynolds.

“That’s a core constituency, and we offer nine courses per year in support of it.

Most of them are going over for a year to Iraq or Afghanistan or three to four years for the Pacific or Europe. Then, we have those based in-CONUS working to support the overseas programs. That’s the bulk of our courses.”

International students from partner countries can also take advantage of DISAM instruction, according to Reynolds.

“We offer a course which is a broad guide to everything involved with the transfer of U.S. equipment to their countries – grant programs or using host country-budgeted funds to procure an F-16 or a Humvee or whatever. We get into all of the logistics, financial arrangements, and how those articles and services are requested.

“The second week of the course breaks down into different tracks,” he continued. “For instance, if a student is working with their ministry of finance, with bill paying and financial arrangements for cases the U.S. government has with their country, they go to instruction with a financial focus. If they’re working on transportation or logistics, getting items to the right people in their country after they’ve procured it, they go to logistics oriented instruction. A third track is training. That’s the primary course international students take.”

DISAM also conducts resident courses on the road, sending small teams of

faculty to DoD entities such as AMCOM (U.S. Army Aviation and Missile Life Cycle Management Com mand), to defense industry companies including Lockheed-Martin, and directly to U.S. combatant commands (COCOMs) overseas. In addition, the institute monitors the International Affairs Certification Program for DSCA and administers a Global Master of Arts Program for the international affairs workforce.

DISA M reaches out fu r ther v ia partnersh ips w ith other Secu rity Cooperation organizations, including the Joint Military Attaché School and the Defense Acquisition University, and sends speakers to the U.S. Marine Corps’ Security Cooperation Planners Course and the U.S. Navy/ U.S. Coast Guard International Maritime Officer Course.

All of this is accomplished by a staff of just 68 faculty, administrators, and IT professionals.

“We have about 42 instructors currently,” Reynolds said. “The 12 military positions that are faculty include Army, Navy, and Air Force officers. On average they’re here for three years.

Civilian faculty have a wide range of experience. Some of them have ex-military backgrounds, some have worked as SCOs. We hire people with technology transfer backgrounds or more general logistics backgrounds. Most of the instructors will be familiar with one or two of the facets of SAM [Security Assistance Management] but they have to become familiar with the other Security Cooperation areas this touches.”

Now serving almost 2,000 students in resident courses at WPAFB, more than

U.S. Army Maj. Gen. George Smith, Security Assistance Office director, answers questions prior to the conclusion of the Defense Institute for Security Assistance Management senior executive course at the Ministerial Training and Development Center in Baghdad, Iraq, Jan. 14, 2008.

5,000 people online, and another 1,200 via on-the-road courses yearly, DISAM is operating at a historic pace. Looking ahead, Reynolds expects the tempo to remain at current levels.

“A lot more people are involved in Security Cooperation or on the outskirts of it today than ever.”

Perhaps DISAM’s Deputy Director, Research and Assistant Professor of Security Cooperation Lt. Col. Thomas Williams sums it up best: “If it seems incredible how DISAM adjusts to meet the needs of the Security Cooperation work forc e, of fer i ng a n a r ray of services and courses, it is. It really is a matrix organization.”

DIILS “Our role within DSCA is as the lead Security Cooperation resource for professional legal education and training,” DIILS Special Assistant for Plans and Strategy Jeffrey Stefani explained.

Based at Naval Station Newport (NSN), R.I., DIILS supports U.S. foreign policy and security policy with rule of law training and education focused on human rights, international humanitarian law, and the law of armed conflict.

Staffed by a small cadre (approximately

79

Tough. Reliable. Ready to Serve.

You protect others. We protect you.

Global Fleet Sales, a subsidiary of the RMA Group is the authorized distributor for Ford Motor Company products to relief, aid and developments programs worldwide.

GFS is your total global solu�ons provider for vehicles, eet management services, and specialized vehicle modica�ons. We’ve efficently supplied and supported over 40,000 light tac�cal, armored and other modied vehicles for peacekeeping opera�ons throughout Asia, Africa and the Middle East.

Through our Foreign Military Sales Program, we are able to handle all of your ground mobility needs.

Call us today for more informaƟon 1-248-327-6484!

A trusted partner on the ground that can provide: • Specialized vehicle conversions including light tac�cal vehicles, armored security personnel carriers, ambulances, and more...

• Armored vehicles that meet or exceed B6/NIJ III standards • Workshop �ed parts and accessories to vehicles as required • Strictest quality standards for vehicle tes�ng • Total eet and life-cycle management • Tailor-made logis�cs to meet your requirements • Complete parts and warranty support in more than 70 countries • Consolidated nancing and leasing programs Current TACOM Contract Number: W56HZV-11-C-0338 • Ford Ranger Light Tac�cal Vehicles – Police/Mobile Maintenance/ Army packages available • Trusted by the Afghan Na�onal Security Forces since 2006

Contact Us Today: sales@globaleetsales.net | www.globaleetsales.net

U.S. Army Africa photo

30) of civilian attorneys and joint-service military lawyers (JAGs), DIILS sends personnel to foreign countries to conduct courses, seminars, and workshops for foreign military officers, legal advisers, and related civilians.

The institute strives to build partner legal capacity, including equitable, transparent, and accountable security sectors, civilian control of the military, and human rights, and representative, elected governments through its mobile education teams (METs), resident courses and other engagements.

“We train military and civilian clients because a country’s legal structure can be very different than the legal systems here in the U.S.,” Stefani stressed. “So you never know who has jurisdiction over what. Our courses, more often than not, include civilians because that’s the way our partner countries are organized to handle military justice and various other crimes.”

Seven Resident Courses are offered at Newport each year, with select classes scheduled biannually.

“We cover a variety of topics with the Resident Courses based on ongoing conversations with geographic combatant commanders about the most urgent and pressing legal challenges they face in their respective AORs [areas of responsibility],” Stefani said. “We’re a global organization.

We have to take into account all of their priorities and balance them when we create new resident courses.”

The meat of DIILS’ work, however, t a ke s pl a c e aw ay f rom it s NSN Headquarters. In 2011, the institute conducted more than 130 MET seminars worldwide for constituents including DSCA, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, and the U.S. COCOMs. “Our clientele traditionally is civilians who work with the military or the military itself,” explained DIILS Director Capt. Robert A. Sanders (USN).

“Depending on the type of instruct ion, t hat cou ld be a nyone f rom enlisted troops who are active on the ground pulling the trigger to the CO [commanding officer] of the organization,” he said. “That varies depending on what a particular program is and where it’s being taught. Anything that touches the security realm that has a legal aspect is game for our interaction and integration. We have hundreds of

modules that we’ve developed over the years that we continually update with current law for presentation in these programs. The interactive part of this is that the modules are a discussion.

What is the international standard?

How does the U.S. apply that standard in our operations? What were the positives from that application and what were the negatives? Where did we succeed and where did we fail?”

Prog rams are “i nd iv idual ized,” according to Sanders, to address the concerns or capabilities a nation or state wishes to develop.

“We have four civilian attorneys who are our regional program directors.

They’re the people who think up and design our mobile programs. Once they’ve developed written concepts, they pass them off to a group of five military officers who do all of the logistics planning and execute those programs with the assistance of adjunct professors. We essentially pull adjuncts based on need.”

The “adjuncts” are critical to DIILS’ reach and success. The Institute maintains a pool of more than 175 adjuncts globally who join DIILS teams for METs and resident programs. Sanders offered a couple examples of how adjuncts are employed.

“If we’re doing a program on corruption, we might go to the Department of Justice

Graduates of an anti-corruption seminar hosted by the Defense Institute for International Legal Studies (DIILS) are pictured with their diplomas. The participants, Forces Armées de la République Démocratique du Congo (FARDC) personnel from the General Headquarters of the Ituri Operational Zone in Bunia, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), pose with Lt. Col. Tim Tuckey, U.S. Army Africa’s Office of the Staff Judge Advocate, center, and, to Tuckey’s right, Special Representative of the Secretary-General for the DRC Christine Besong, who serves as the Head of Mission for La Missione delle Nazioni Unite nella Repubblica Democratica del Congo (MONUC). Also pictured are Chief Legalman (LNC) Jeffrey A. Davis and Cmdr. Rebecca Snyder, U.S. Navy officers assigned to DIILS in Newport, R.I.

and find somebody with recent experience prosecuting corruption cases. We’ll also go to the JAG offices of the services and see if anyone’s done corruption cases recently for the military and pull the people with the most recent and relevant experience.

“For our recent program on counterterrorism, we brought in a retired officer from Sri Lanka who lost his arm in a terrorist attack. He now runs the

81

With a 40-year history and lawyers who are bar and industry leaders, Crowell & Moring LLP’s Government Contracts law practice is widely recognized as the best in the business. We are unmatched in our experience representing clients on the full spectrum of international procurement issues including: • Export Controls • Foreign Corrupt Practices Act • Foreign Military Financing/Foreign Military Sales • International Arbitration and Litigation • Offset Arrangements • Anti-Boycott Compliance

experience. creativity. results.

Crowell & Moring LLP n www.crowell.com Washington, DC n New York n Los Angeles n San Francisco n Orange County n Anchorage n London n Brussels n Cairo n Riyadh

Pillsbury. Helping companies navigate U.S. and international defense procurement opportunities.

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 2300 N Street, NW | Washington, DC 20037 | 202.663.8000 www.pillsburylaw.com The Department of Defense did not select or approve this advertiser and does not endorse and is not responsible for the views or statements contained in this advertisement.

In battle field conditions when the weather and the elements are against you, it is a time for your weapon to be on your side. The PRi Gas Buster ® is a safety device that will tame the blowback from the M16 and M4 that can blind your shooting eye or dirty your glasses.

The Gas Buster ® works on either Gas or Piston operated weapons and is available for 7.62mm AR style weapons.

419.629.2603

precisionreflex.com

human rights program for the military throughout his country. Right now we’re in the midst of a program on human rights and one of the instructors is a British officer who taught on the British army experience in Northern Ireland related to international humanitarian rights and the laws of armed conflict.”

The “ideal” model for a typical DIILS seminar begins with a survey team traveling to a country and engaging with that nation’s embassy representatives or representatives of the various ministries involved with security sector legal implementation. DIILS team members learn about their challenges as specifically as possible.

In a second phase, a small group of leaders is invited to the United States to gain a more in-depth understanding of the resources DIILS can draw upon to develop an appropriate program based on an assessment of their requirements. The third step in the process is to conduct seminars for participants either in-country as a mobile program and/or resident course participation by that country.

One illustration of how a DIILS program works is a five-year engagement the institute has been conducting with officials in the Congo, as Sanders explained.

“We were initially asked to go in and lay out a program to combat sexually based violence. This was gender-based violence not only being committed by the country’s rebel insurgency but also by the military, who were supposed to be protecting the people. In the process of trying to lay out that program, we discovered that the rudiments of a military justice system did not exist in the Congo in the sense of international standards or Western military criteria. As we examined the situation, we recognized that there needed to be a basic level of knowledge about the options for the Congolese as opposed to telling them the answer to the sexual violence question exclusively.”

“So we took two steps back and began to help build their military justice system over a multiyear period. We trained the trainers. Congolese magistrates became part of the first classes.

They learned some of the international standards they hadn’t been exposed to and how to apply them. Then they began to join our teams and help train the

rest of their troops. A team would be made up of Americans from DIILS and adjuncts, and Congolese magistrates.

They went into the field throughout the country to train the troops, from the leadership to the enlisted soldiers, on what a professional military is and does. And what a professional military justice system is and how it functions.

“Fast for ward to 2011 and the Congolese m i l it a r y ha s act ua l ly conducted courts-martial of officers who committed the type of acts we were initially called in to address. When one of our DIILS teams was on hand for the courts-martials and talked to the magistrates about what they were doing and how they were doing it – what standards they were using – they pulled DIILS manuals out of their bags that were two years old. They were their guide for the cases they were executing.”

DIILS also conducts seminars/engagements with countries with more developed military and legal frameworks, including a recent program conducted with a NATO PFP (Partnership for Peace) country deployed in Afghanistan alongside U.S. forces.

Lacking a Judge Advocate General’s Corps, the civilian attorneys working in the nation’s ministry of defense had no experience with international military rules of engagement and the law of armed conflict. DIILS brought several of the country’s civilian attorneys to its resident SOLARA (Stability Operations: Legal Aspects of ROE/RUF [Rules of Engagement/Rules for the Use of force] Afghanistan) course. The class trains lawyers and commanders to serve alongside NATO/ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) forces in Afghanistan to help them understand rules of engagement and the laws of armed conflict, and to get real world examples from those on the battlefield or who have just left the battlefield. The SOLARA course helped the PFP nation’s attorneys understand the challenges of fighting different types of engagements, the things their troops will be faced with, and remedies for the troops’ actions, criminal or not.

“As a result, that country now embeds a civilian attorney from their attorney general’s office with each unit that’s going through training on their way to Afghanistan,” Sanders said.

Another critical tasking for DIILS involves implementation of the human rights aspects of the 1206 program.

Created in the wake of 9/11, Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act provides the Secretary of Defense with authority to train and equip foreign military forces (Security Assistance) for two specified purposes: counterterrorism and stability operations, and foreign maritime security forces for counterterrorism operations.

“Instruction in human rights is a prerequisite for that training and equipment based on the statutes in the Foreign Assistance Act,” Sanders explained. “DIILS is the DoD entity that does the 1206 human rights training globally for our partners in the counterterrorism mission.”

“Almost biweekly, we have a field team leaving, returning from, or preparing to leave for a 1206 mission somewhere around the world. The teams consist of three officers led by one of our International Operations Officers or the Reserve components that supports us [Army Reserve, Navy Reserve, and individual augmenters from all services].

They leave their civilian jobs, put on their uniforms, and join us as DIILS adjuncts. The 1206 teams go out and give human rights and humanitarian law training to all recipients of 1206 training and equipment.”

With its operations and maintenance budget significantly increased over the last two years, DIILS has planned and taken on more engagements than at any time in its history. In 2011, the institute conducted programs in 54 countries.

“I anticipate that we’ll stabilize in the area of about 130-plus engagements per year across more than 50 countries where we train 4,000 participants in our resident and mobile programs over a fiscal year,” said Sanders.

Anticipating more demand from the international Security Cooperation community, Sanders is making plans to expand the organization’s staff and capability.

“I’ve already engaged my leadership and the service judge advocate.

I’m in dialogue with them about adding uniformed judge advocates to our staff.

We do our best to work in conjunction with other Security Cooperation programs where synergies allow us to do so.” n

83

Executive Agent

DSCA Supports the Regional Centers’ Security Cooperation Network-building Mission

By Jan tegler

S

ecurity Cooperation depends upon relationships – interactions between the United States and sovereign nations t hat bu i ld t r u st, u nderstanding, and capabilities that promote A mer ica n i nterests a nd en ha nce security worldwide. While there are a wide variety of programs (technical, financial, training, and military-tomilitary) that facilitate this goal, it’s easy to forget that people are the root of Security Cooperation.

Bringing people together at international venues for bilateral and multilateral study, communication, and exchange of ideas has been the central mission of the Department of Defense’s (DoD’s) Regional Centers for Security Studies since their formation in the mid-1990s.

In the wake of Sept. 11, 2001, the Secretary of Defense recognized that the five Regional Centers could be powerful tools in the global war on terrorism.

Accordingly, the centers were directed to bolster their presence within each of their regions and expand their outreach to nongovernment organizations and nongovernment elites, while enhancing coordination among themselves and broadening collaboration with the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of State.

84

They were also advised to begin preparations for a transition to the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) which would serve as “the unified executive agent for all centers.” On Sept. 29, 2005, then-Deputy Secretary of Defense Gordon England signed a memorandum, “Executive Agent for DoD Regional Centers for Security Studies,” establishing the DSCA as the executive agent for the regional centers effective Oct. 1, 2005.

“Essentially what that did was bring all five Regional Centers, including three Washington, D.C.-based Regional Centers – the Africa Center for Strategic Studies [ACSS], the Near East South Asia Center [for Strategic Studies (NESA)], and the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies [CHDS] – under DSCA,” explained Jay Schwartzmann, DSCA’s Regional Centers program manager.

“Orig inally they fell under NDU [National Defense University] and the Joint Staff. The Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies [APCSS] fell under PACOM [U.S. Pacific Command] and the Marshall Center [the George C. Marshall European Center for Security Studies] came under EUCOM [U.S. European Command].”

The move was part of a larger effort to rationalize and unify the individual reporting structures that had governed

the centers over the first years of their operations. Previously, the centers operated under the authority, direction, and control of their respective combatant commands (COCOMs), with the Marshall Center and ACSS under U.S. European Command, APCSS under U.S. Pacific Command, CHDS under U.S. Southern Command, and NESA under U.S. Central Command.

The new structure, in place since fiscal 2006, brings the Regional Centers under three different authorities. As before, the centers report directly to their respective COCOMs, executing their mission under the control of the COCOMs. But the policy and administrative aspects of their operations are managed by two separate agencies – the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy (USDP) and DSCA. USDP provides policy guidance and management oversight for the centers via the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Partnership Strategy and Stability Operations (DASD PSO). DASD PSO provides global and functional priorities for the centers, as well as a framework for the provision of regionspecific policy objectives.

Once policy is defined, DSCA acts as the “administrative authority” for the centers, providing programming, budgeting, and financial management

U.S. Army photo by Sgt. Christopher Harper

of the resources necessary to support their operations (personnel costs and maintenance and base operations support costs).

“Basically, that’s the budget for the centers,” Schwartzmann said. “They get the policy guidance from USDP and get fiscal guidance from us. At the same time, the COCOMs have their theater Security Cooperation campaign plans, which the centers also address. They have to think about all of their stakeholders when they put together a plan for a year, not just policy and DSCA but the COCOMs and the participants themselves.

“In general, we [DSCA] work with the centers’ staff to develop a plan to provide the funding and resources necessary to carry out their programs,” he continued.

“The funding goes out on Oct. 1 and they execute their plans as approved through the policy chain. The funding comes to DSCA as a single line item in the budget for the centers. We work with USDP, which provides the targets for the individual centers and help arrive at any adjustments to their budgets.”

“It’s much more i nvolved t ha n getting the money, sending it to the centers and leaving them to their own devices until the end of the year,” Schwartzmann said. “The process the centers go through for their program plans requires them to demonstrate in advance how their programs are meeting the policy objectives in their campaign plans. At DSCA, we track their obligations to make sure they’re in line with their spending plans. We do the same thing with their manpower and their FTE [financing, training, and end-use] spending. Each month we get a report on how they are executing their funding in accordance with their monthly obligation plans. The report is submitted to the DSCA comptroller.

The comptroller provides our authority based on that obligation plan. That’s our focus in terms of execution.”

In a nutshell, DSCA reviews each of the centers’ program plans for a given year to ensure they align with available resources and authorities.

Properly funded, the centers can get

Command Sgt. Maj. Thomas Capel, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and U.S. Forces-Afghanistan senior enlisted leader, conveys the ISAF commander’s intent to a room full of leaders at the International Senior Enlisted Seminar, (ISES) Sept. 7, 2012, at the George C. Marshall Center for Security Studies in Garmisch, Germany. Capel was invited to provide an ISAF operational brief by ISES organizers at U.S. European Command and Supreme Allied Command Europe.

on with their main business: building and establishing networks of security practitioners.

“The centers operate at the strategic level, working with mid- to senior-level military and civilian officials and NGOs [nongovernmental organizations] and other organizations internationally,” said Schwartzmann. “They strive to bring in all of the key players in regional issues, not just military people. They seek a whole-of-government approach to solving problems.”

85

AIR ■ Complete solution for rapid maneuvering, hard landings and turbulent air ■ MIL-STD-810

LAND ■ Isolators suitable for rough terrain, poor road conditions and collision

For more information go to: www.vibrationmounts.com/military

SEA ■ Isolators suitable to minimize inherent vibration and blast ■ MIL-S-901D and MIL-STD-167

CHDS online photo

Each of the centers has different areas of focus depending on their region, but all serve three main policy goals, outlined in a February 2011 memorandum from the Under Secretary of Defense.

All Regional Centers will facilitate engagement with and among foreign participants to: 1) Enhance regional security through the creation of collaborative communities of interest among military and civilian officials from states in the region, and examine fundamental causes of relevant security challenges and the most effective means to counter them.

2) Strengthen sustainable institutional capacity at the national and transnational level to enhance national, regional, and international security consistent with the norms of democratic governance in civil and military relations.

3) Foster defense support to civil authorities in dealing with disasters in a manner consistent with each country’s legal, historical, and cultural norms and a proper role in the military and democratic societies.

So how do the Regional Centers fulfill these goals? By engaging people, lots of them, in each of the regions within which they function. The senior military, government officials, and civilian authorities invited to attend Regional Center programs are known as “participants.” According to Schwartzmann, as many as 9,000 participants engage with the centers over the course of a year.

“Primarily, they bring participants into these academic environments for seminars, courses, and programs to address a wide range of topics. They can be broad-based subjects such as the program on advanced security cooperation at the Marshall Center, a 10-week program which gives a broad assessment of the security issues affecting that region. It’s one of their core programs.

They have other programs such as senior executive seminars, which are short one- to two-week courses. Each one of the centers has something similar.”

Resident programs conducted at the centers not only provide academic i n st r uct ion, t hey leverage t he

Participants in the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies’ Caribbean Defense and Security Course compare experiences.

opportunity for participants to gain an American cultural experience at the same time. Alternately, regional in-theater programs provide unique “outreach” opportunities to understand regional challenges and concerns and tailor the content of seminars, courses, and workshops.

Schwartzmann said that participants are usually hand-picked as the centers put together programs. For example, if a Regional Center is putting together a program on disaster management, senior off icials from that region’s disaster-relief community are sought to add to the dialog as they discuss issues.

“The size of their individual programs varies,” he added. “The broad-based programs are larger, some of them with as many as 100 to 140 participants. On the other hand, there are very focused small seminars with 20 or less participants.

87

Advanced Technology and Products for the Most Difficult Missons

Imaging Systems include low

profile, digital, and fused night vision devices; Heads Up Displays and viewers for night and day applications (HUD / HMD); and Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (ISR) equipment in the Visible, NIR, and SWIR spectral bands.

Beacon Systems include Combat Identification / Identification of Friend or Foe (CID/IFF) as well as Tagging, Tracking, and Locating (TTL) systems. Our products are available in spectral bands that include UV, Visible, NIR, SWIR, MWIR, and LWIR.

The Sensor Systems Divison of The O’Gara Group is a leading designer and manufacturer of Imaging, Beacon and Laser Systems for Special Operations Forces.

Laser Systems manufactured include illuminators, pointers, and designators. Our products are available in spectral bands that include UV, Visible, NIR, SWIR, MWIR, and LWIR.

.ogarasensorsystems.com

www

ContaCt: sensors@ogaragroup.Com phone: (937) 490-2509

Photo courtesy of Africa Center for Strategic Studies

Usually the number is somewhere in between for most of the programs.”

Staffed by a combination of academic, governmental, diplomatic, and military practitioners from the United States and their respective regions, the centers are led by senior officials from the State Department (including ambassadors) and senior military officials within the DoD. “They bring in experts from across the Security Cooperation community, both U.S. and foreign, to facilitate their programs,” Schwartzmann said. “They draw these facilitators to lead many of their programs. They’ll bring in people from the Pentagon, the State Department, and private organizations as needed.

There’s also a support element within the centers, comprised of experts in budgeting, logistics, and planning.”

In addition to budgeting for operations, DSCA is responsible for managing the centers’ budgets for manpower, providing civilian personnel for staffing, and military and civilian human resources services support and personnel management for the Regional Centers.

“That’s the manpower authorizations that come to DSCA to manage for the centers and for all of our programs,” Schwartzman said. “We don’t get into personnel support directly here because we’re not collocated with all of the centers. We have a memorandum with the Army to support the Marshall Center in Europe. The Navy supports the Asia-Pacific Center in Hawaii. NDU has a unique relationship with the Washington, D.C.-based centers. They provide personnel and other support to them. We manage the fiscal side.”

Each Regional Center also has an outreach or alumni section that works to maintain contact with participants long after they’ve taken part in specific programs or seminars. The idea is to leverage alumni as a mechanism to influence military organizations, governments, academics, key civil society actors, representatives of international organizations, NGOs, and private-sector entities important to U.S. government and DoD goals and objectives in the region. “ Ty p i c a l l y t h e c e n t e r s h a v e a n out reach or a lu m n i sect ion,” Schwartzmann said. “The goal of the centers is not just to funnel people through their programs but to build

Security Cooperation relationships and networks of people in a region’s security community. So a big aspect of the centers’ efforts is keeping in touch with alumni after they’ve completed programs. These alumni sections put together outreach programs and do their best to maintain contacts, visiting foreign countries and getting alumni together to discuss potential issues in their country or region. That helps DoD to understand what’s happening on the ground currently in the regions – what the main concerns, issues, and perceptions or misperceptions are.”

Providing administrative support to the Regional Centers is a more involved process than it may appear. The Centers Management Office, in conjunction with other offices under DSCA’s Programs Directorate, works diligently to make sure the centers’ spending and obligations are in synch.

“We are the overall program managers for DSCA’s responsibilities to the centers, but we’re not the only entity dealing with them,” Schwartzmann emphasized.

“There are 45 to 50 people within DSCA involved in some way with the centers.

It’s a team effort to support them. The Programs Directorate, the DBO Office [Business Operations Directorate] and the Office of General Counsel are involved daily. We also work with our Policy and

U.S. Air Forces in Europe (USAFE) and the Senegalese Air Force, with support from the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, hosted the Regional Air Chiefs Conference held Aug. 29-30, 2012, in Dakar, Senegal.

Strategy Offices and the front office on multiple issues involving the centers.”

“We work through our Off ice of General Cou nsel on i nternational agreements, co-sponsorships, and memorandums of agreement. There are, in turn, controls that we have to put into place and report on the Regional Centers. There is the litany of tasks that go along with budgeting, including the congressional briefs we have to do on behalf of the office of budget submission. There are ORF [official representational funds] funds that we get involved in, reimbursable authority which means that the centers can accept other sources of funding up to a certain amount. There are civilian pay issues that we get involved in, and many legal issues and responsibilities that arise when funding comes to DSCA for the centers. There are fiscal law issues we deal with as well as matters of contracts law and administrative law.

We have to make sure the centers are operating within their authorities.” n

89

Continuing in Service

The Enduring Value of Excess Defense Articles

By J.R. Wilson

S

ince the Vietnam War, U.S. m i l it a r y eq u ipment t he services say they no longer need, classified as Excess Defense Articles (EDA), has been made available for purchase by, or grant to, foreign governments and international organizations. Such transfers, made in support of U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives, are administered by the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA).

“DSCA provides policy oversight and prepares congressional notifications for EDA,” Legislative and Public Affairs Office Director Vanessa Allen Murray said.

“We do not decide what is excess; that determination is made by each military department as to what it no longer needs.

“That then goes through a vetting process to see if another [U.S.] government entity – federal or state – needs that equipment. Once all of that is completed, then DSCA gets involved.”

EDA typically is used to support the modernization efforts of U.S. allies and to assist Latin American and Caribbean nations i n thei r cou nternarcotics programs. The Foreign Assistance Act defines EDA as: “… the quantity of defense articles (other than construction equipment, including tractors, scrapers, loaders, graders, bulldozers, dump trucks,

90

generators and compressors) owned by the United States government – and not procured in anticipation of military assistance or sales requirements or pursuant to a military assistance or sales order – which is in excess of the Approved Force Acquisition Objective and Approved Force Retention Stock of all Department of Defense [DoD] components at the time such articles are dropped from inventory by the supplying agency for delivery to countries or international organizations under this Act.” If requests exceed available items, the EDA Coordinating Committee, co-chaired by DSCA and the State Department’s Office of Regional Security and Arms Transfers (PM/RSAT) in the Bureau of Political-Military Affairs (PM), with representatives from the Department of Commerce and DoD regional and functional policy offices, agrees on a f inal allocation of the articles. At that point, EDA is offered at reduced or no cost to eligible foreign recipients on an “as is, where is” basis.

“So whatever condition it is in and wherever it is, any nation that buys EDA is responsible for refurbishing, packing, transporting, training, etc. So even EDA isn’t free,” Murray explained.

“Most countries that buy or are granted EDA know there will be some maintenance or support tail involved.

Those with the money will buy that support; others may use FMF [Foreign Military Financing] for follow-on support and training, although that is not the preferred approach, because we prefer they use those funds for new equipment.”

While a greater-than-usual level of EDA involves equipment the U.S. military has used during the war in Southwest Asia – much of which has remained there – most of the largest items, such as ships and aircraft, are decommissioned in the United States and put into storage pending a final decision on their fate.

“When military aircraft are declared excess, they are sent to a facility in Arizona called the AMARG [Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Group], where the aircraft are preserved and stored,” FMS specialist June Squire said.

“If a country requests an aircraft that happens to be at AMARG, it is taken out of storage and granted or sold. Either way, the recipient pays for all cost involved with getting it out of AMARG, refurbished, and transferred.”

The sale or grant of EDA is administered by DSCA’s Building Partnership Capacity (BPC) Division. The price charged when such items are sold typically ranges from 5 percent to 50 percent of the original acquisition value, based on age and condition. Should the recipient ever decide to sell an EDA to

U.S. navy photo by Petty Officer 1st Class Jennifer Villalovos

Morocco receives a shipment of U.S. Army surplus. Various types of equipment, including pallets of ammunition, were delivered to Morocco as a result of two Excess Defense Articles Foreign Military Sales cases originating from the U.S. Army Security Assistance Command (USASAC).

another nation, they must have U.S. permission and give the United States the first right to proceeds from any such sale.

The process of EDA transfers is complex and can take several years to complete, depending on the nature of the equipment and the requesting nations involved.

“The military department will receive a Letter of Request [LOR], similar to what we get for any Foreign Military Sales [FMS], asking for old trucks or something. That department then determines what they have available and sends the request to DSCA, which coordinates with State, policy offices in the Pentagon and the Department of Commerce – because sales or grants of EDA are not supposed to interfere with the ability of U.S. companies to sell new,” Murray said.

“State is the entity that decides when or if a country is eligible to receive defense items or services. We also want to make sure any transfers are consistent with DoD’s policies and goals for that nation and region, or if some other nation may have a higher need for those items. DSCA

also prepares the congressional notification for certain values of EDA, after which DSCA will go back to the military department and say it is OK to offer it to that nation and sign for the transfer.”

Making a request for EDA known to be available does not guarantee that the equipment will be approved for a grant transfer to a particular nation.

“To be eligible for a grant depends on their economic situation,” Squire said. “Generally, countries have to be FMS-eligible to be grant-eligible, but there are also other criteria.

Considerations include agreements in place and if the country has or can maintain a platform. You wouldn’t want to provide a C-130 to a nation where a support structure is not in place.

91

We integrate sensors from air, land and sea into one picture.

SSReng.com 2556 W. Woodland Drive Anaheim CA 92801 USA T +(0)1 714.229.9020 F +(0)1 714.229.9015 info@ssreng.com

U.S. Army Photo by Sgt. David Strayer, 109th MPAD, USD-N

“They also have to sign end-use agreements regarding the use, security, and future transfer of the item. If a nation then sells an EDA, depending on the value of the grant, after investing a lot into refurbishment and modernization, then they get a specific percentage and so does the U.S., varying by circumstance. That is called a third-party transfer and is governed by State.”

When the U.S. military shuts down a base or reduces or concludes combat operations in a country such as Iraq or Afghanistan, some of the equipment that had been used there may be declared EDA rather than being removed or destroyed.

“We did leave stuff in Iraq, such as a security system that was declared EDA and granted to Iraq, which did submit a request for it. There also were vehicle bridges that were laid down in Iraq and it was impossible to remove them, so rather than destroy them – as we would have to have done had they not been declared EDA – they were granted to Iraq,” Squire said.

“The drawdown in Afghanistan will increase the number of items available as EDA, but that’s not the major source in the EDA process. Items become out of date due to technology, weapons systems evolve, forces downsize – the military departments then determine what equipment, weapons systems, items such as tents and uniforms are excess. The excess can then be offered to FMS-eligible and grant-eligible nations.”

How a nation makes – and remains on – the grant-eligible list is only one step in the eligibility process, which also includes input from geographic and functional combatant commands (COCOMs).

Each year the State Department prepares a list of EDA grant-eligible countries, which then is submitted to Congress with justification as to what the EDA items can be used for. Even if they meet all other requirements and sign off on all restrictions, any nations that have been placed under sanction or where human rights violations have been cited can see an EDA request rejected.

Iraqi army soldiers from the 5th Division familiarize themselves with an M113 armored personnel carrier during the first several days of their tracked vehicle drivers training course at Kirkush Military Training Base, Diyala province, Iraq, May 9, 2011. M113s are one of the more popular EDA items in demand.

Once an approved list of items and an approved recipient nations list are in hand, DSCA begins its extensive approval process, based on the nature of the equipment involved and the nation seeking it.

“When I get a package from a military department – an LOR from the country, identification and number of items, where it will be used and for what purpose, if and where and how it will be refurbished, etc. – all that is sent to State for clearance.

Until we receive that clearance, we cannot approve the transfer,” she said.

“Every request is also cleared by the Commerce Department, because we cannot impact the industrial base. If continued on page 95

93

Golden Sentry End Use Monitoring in Action

By J.R. Wilson

A

1996 amendment to the U.S. Arms Export Control Act required the president to create an End Use Monitoring (EUM) program for equipment leased or sold to allies. That led to the 2001 creation of Golden Sentry, which monitors government-to-government sales, primarily under the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program.

As part of the Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), Golden Sentry was designed to provide reasonable assurance that those receiving such equipment comply with proper use transfer agreements, including adequate protection and security of materiel. It also oversees restrictions on the use or subsequent sale or transfer to a third party, as detailed in U.S. arms export control and foreign assistance acts.

“To execute the program, DoD has four major entities involved: DSCA; the military departments, which draft the LOAs [Letters of Offer and Acceptance] for FMS and ensure the receiving nations commit to the EUM process before the equipment is delivered; the COCOMs [combatant commands]; and Security Cooperation Organizations,” Golden Sentry Program Manager Chuck Handal said.

“DSCA basically develops policy guidance, then disseminates that throughout U.S. agencies, COCOMs and SCOs [Security Cooperation Officers] worldwide. We enforce and ensure compliance and also provide an annual report to Congress. The Arms Export Control Act also requires an annual report to Congress by the president, which my office drafts and submits to [the State Department], along with other reports, which State consolidates and submits to Congress on behalf of the president.”

To meet all those requirements, Golden Sentry relies on the efforts of Security Assistance personnel drawn from all the military services and stationed with SCOs at U.S. embassies in each recipient nation. In addition to working with the host nation on requests for equipment, they are responsible for two levels of EUM. “Routine monitoring [REUM] is performed through their day-to-day functions, visiting host nation military installations and interacting with other personnel supporting Security Assistance programs to ensure equipment received from the U.S. is being used for the purpose for which it was intended, including no unauthorized third parties have access to the equipment or service. They report any potential violations to State and DSCA, then State determines what actions need to be taken in terms of investigations and, if required, notification of violations to Congress,” Handal explained.

“Enhanced monitoring applies to specific, sensitive technologies. In addition to REUM, the monitors must physically

94

go to facilities where the equipment is stored and conduct serial number inventories to assure accountability. We track all these inventories in a secured database maintained by DSCA. Those include secure communications equipment, Stinger missiles, night vision devices, anti-tank missiles, some air-to-air missiles – such as AMRAAM – Category 1 UAS [unmanned aerial systems], some large aircraft countermeasure systems, high altitude surface-to-air missiles and SM-3 [Standard Missiles], cruise missiles, and other systems that involve very sensitive technology.”

They also track classified software and data that go with those technologies, ensuring they are properly secured.

When equipment is used – in testing, training or combat – or lost, the country must formally notify DSCA and, if lost, conduct an investigation to assure the Unite States it won’t happen again.

In addition to more than 700 uniformed SCO personnel at some 125 embassies around the world, DSCA has five specialists who manage the program in each COCOM – Europe, Africa, Pacific, Central and Southern. They make roughly quarterly compliance assessment visits to each COCOM, verifying the SCOs are implementing DoD policy and going to host nation facilities for an additional check on compliance with the transfer agreements.

“These are very formal visits, involving both in- and out-briefings and, at the end, a formal report, signed by the DSCA director, to the COCOM and the Security Cooperation Organization for their information and action,” Handal said.

EUM is, above all else, intended to ensure military equipment and other assistance provided to help U.S. allies defend themselves does not end up being used against the United States. While some may consider such detailed and constant oversight intrusive, the same practices are applied with equal vigor in all FMS recipient nations, from the smallest developing nation to America’s oldest and most powerful allies.

“The EUM program basically involves interaction with many other agencies, with the four major DoD components taking the lead. In the pre-delivery process and the LOA, we have provisions regarding strict end-use provisions,” Handal concluded.

“That includes a specific EUM note that commits the recipient to allow the U.S. access to perform the required end use checks – and there are no exemptions for anyone.

If a country does not agree to those, we will not export anything to them through FMS, whether it is Canada or Pakistan or wherever.” n

U.S. Coast Guard photo by pa3 l.f. chamber

continued from page 93

industry is trying to sell an item to a country, we can’t undermine them by providing that item via EDA. OSD Policy also reviews each request and DSCA lawyers determine if all legal requirements are met. We also notify Congress if it is a piece of significant military equipment or if the original acquisition cost was more than $7 million for all items in a request. If we haven’t had an objection from Congress in 30 days, we can move ahead with the transfer.”

The nature of EDA and what different nations actually request is nearly as broad as the inventory of U.S. military equipment. “ We t ra n sfer ever y t h i ng f rom tents and pots and pans to ships and aircraft,” Security Assistance Analyst Susan Kidd noted.

Humvees and trucks are among the most popular requests from smaller nations, although Abrams tanks also are on many wish lists, along with helicopters, C-130 transport aircraft, M113 armored personnel carriers, and naval vessels.

In the case of the latter, any vessel less

than 20 years old or larger than 3,000 tons requires congressional legislation, on a ship-by-ship, nation-by-nation basis.

Each year, the Navy provides a list of vessels it expects to be decommissioned, then proposes legislation for those ships, including what nations have requested which ships and which they believe should receive them. Even successful completion of what can be

A former U.S. Coast Guard 82-foot patrol boat, now part of the Azeri Maritime Brigade, tied up to the pier in Baku, Azerbaijan.

Copyright Mile Marker Inc. 2012. Photos courtesy of BAE SYSTEMS and AM GENERAL.

a lengthy approval process is no guarantee, however.

“It’s a long process, involving a lot of State Department and DoD coordination before it ever reaches the Hill. And once it does get to Congress, the legislation can be blocked or changed to remove a country or a ship,” Kidd said.

“But once legislation is passed, we look at it as a whole new request and it goes through the regular coordination process.

All that can take a couple of years. We recently had Bangladesh authorized for a U.S. Coast Guard cutter, for example, but it ended up not being decommissioned.”

DSCA also has some involvement with Direct Commercial Sales to other nations, where a U.S. manufacturer has received government approval to sell something

96

directly to another country. That generally involves the provision of training or additional parts or associated equipment through FMS. In some cases, however, DCS marketing efforts may complicate or delay – if not ultimately block – an EDA transfer, a decision made not by DoD or State, but by the Commerce Department.

“Normally, EDA are items not now commercially available. So it is not just a matter of a country being able to afford new versus EDA – that item is no longer being produced,” Squire explained. “For example, one country recently requested first generation LANTIRN [Low-Altitude Navigation & Targeting Infrared for Night] pods, which were available as EDA. Lockheed objected because they wanted to sell their third generation; first is no longer being produced. But the country wanted first generation, not third.

“This transfer has not yet been authorized, but we believe Commerce

Department will approve the request.

This is the type of thing Commerce Department looks at with industry, asking what they are marketing and how aggressively – all of which may impact approval of an EDA transfer.”

For the past decade, the congressional cap on the value of EDA that can be transferred in each fiscal year has remained at $425 million. The cap does not include ships and, in FY 2010, items turned over to Iraq have not been included, falling instead under special legislation related to that nation as U.S. combat forces withdrew. “The $425 million only represents the current value of items to be transferred, which often is a very small amount. That cap can be raised, but we have to request legislation for that,” Kidd said. “In my experience, we never came close to that cap until the last two years; last year we processed authorizations for about $410 million.” n

U.S. Army photo

A UH-1 “Huey” helicopter is loaded on the cargo ship Houston. USASAC facilitated the FMS of five Hueys to the Philippines.

Premier designer and manufacturer of

Rocket launcheRs and electRonics

• Manufacturing rocket launchers since 1960 • Fixed and rotary wing launchers for both guided and unguided applications • Premier manufacturer of 2.75 inch rocket launchers and SUU25 flare dispensers • Custom R&D, product development and prototype capability • Next generation guided launchers • Our products have served in Vietnam, Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan,

Colombia and on the open seas

• ISO 9001-2008 certified • 100% American made

FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: 636.296.5417

www.arnolddefense.com

The First Line of Defense for Those Who Serve.

“The 20,576 metric tons of chemical agent remaining is a potential threat to millions of innocent lives.”

- ORGANISATION FOR THE PROHIBITION OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS

®

When Every Second Counts...

Multiple NATO Militaries and Ministries of Defense have Chosen RSDecon to Protect their Personnel.

The Global Leader in Skin Decontamination: • Cleared by the US FDA, European CE and Australian TGA • Fielded by US and NATO Militaries • Individual Packet and Multi Packet Kits Available

To find out more about RSDL visit www.RSDecon.com and a sales representative will contact you.

107 College Road East, Princeton, NJ 08540 USA Phone 1.888.773.3266 RSDecon is a Business Unit of Bracco Diagnostics Inc. ©2012 RSDecon.