Control the skies, control the outcome: The criticality of air and space superiority
As a four-star general in the U.S. Air Force, I have spent my career preparing airmen to fly, fight, and win. My job demands ensuring they are trained and equipped to provide the president with credible fail-safe options in an increasingly turbulent world.
That mission has been a driving fixture for the Air Force since its inception in 1947. It is a goal that every American should embrace and be thankful for, even if he or she doesn't realize why.
Owning the sky, being able to fly, and if necessary, successfully fight anywhere at any time has never been more crucial to our national security and the defense of our global interests. It is why we ask so much of our airmen. The price of failure in today's world is unacceptable.
If you need proof, look no further than Ukraine — a war where neither side holds air superiority. The result has been a prolonged, brutal conflict with over a million military and civilian casualties and no clear end in sight. Russia's grinding invasion, initially bolstered by overwhelming firepower, has been slowed and blunted by Ukrainian resistance, built on layered air defenses and agile tactics that deny freedom of maneuver in the skies.
Contrast that with another example: the U.S. Air Force's mission against Iranian nuclear facilities. Supported by fighters and tankers, B-2 bombers flew deep into Iranian airspace, dropped precision-guided munitions within inches of their targets, and exited without facing a single shot. That is air and space superiority.
A deeper analysis of these conflicts provides both lessons and important validation for the money we spend and the effort we devote in the U.S. to ensuring air and space superiority.
Russia entered Ukraine with what appeared to be a massive advantage in aircraft, missiles and long-range weapons. But two years later, it still cannot achieve dominance in the air. Meanwhile, Ukrainian resistance continues to deny that freedom, stalling Russian offensives, disrupting logistics, and limiting precision strike capabilities.
On the opposite spectrum, the Israel Defense Forces — supported by electronic warfare, aerial refueling, real-time satellite intelligence, and precision-guided munitions — have demonstrated the ability to strike critical targets deep within Iranian airspace with near-impunity.
Israel, and in one instance the U.S., has demonstrated the freedom to operate at will while leaving Iran with few credible responses.
Air and space superiority allows the U.S. and its partners to operate without prohibitive interference from the enemy. It grants freedom to attack, freedom from attack, and freedom to maneuver. In larger measure, it is the reason average Americans never worry about a military invasion at home.
But modern air superiority is no longer just about aircraft. It is also deeply tied to the space domain. The U.S. warfighter's reliance on space-based capabilities — such as the Global Positioning System, high-bandwidth communications, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance — make space superiority a prerequisite for success in the air.
This interconnectedness permits air power to be degraded by disrupting space operations. Russia and China understand this. Their growing investment in counter-space capabilities is designed to undermine our effectiveness in the air by targeting the assets we rely on in space.
Maintaining — and ensuring — our advantage in the skies and space isn't cheap. But it is a cost we must bear to prevent even more costly outcomes. It's the reason we spend tax dollars developing the newest, most advanced fighter, the F-47, which is designed to penetrate heavily defended airspace and complete its missions. It's why we underwrite the cost of elite training for air crews, focus on electronic and cyber warfare, and ensure that logistics — from aerial refueling to rapid repair — are resilient and integrated.
To win, we need real-time situational awareness through integrated sensor networks spanning all domains. And we must remain flexible, continuously adapting doctrine to stay ahead of emerging threats from determined and advanced adversaries like China.
History has taught us that decisive victories — and the ability to deter war altogether — are anchored in air and space superiority. We must fund modernization, train relentlessly, and forge strong partnerships with allies and partners who also depend on this shared freedom of action.
We must be ready to win fast and come home.
When we control the skies, we shape the battle. When we control space, we command the tempo. When we do both, we save American lives and ensure a continuing peace of mind, stability and prosperity that are byproducts of a safe and secure nation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
a few seconds ago
- The Hill
Trump's new model to support Ukraine is a win-win
From the start, Ukraine's defense against Russia's full-scale invasion has been underpinned by a robust commitment from its Western partners. The Biden administration's pledge to support Ukraine 'as long as it takes' promised a sustained flow of military and financial aid directly from Washington. This 'direct donor' model was key to Ukraine's initial resilience, providing essential weaponry from U.S. stockpiles. Biden's approach primarily involved direct transfers from U.S. weapons inventories, prioritizing speed and ensuring that Ukraine received vital equipment quickly to counter Russian aggression. The American government provided extensive amounts of equipment, from air-defense missiles to artillery rounds and armored vehicles, directly to Kyiv. Now, under President Trump, the paradigm is shifting. The U.S. is transitioning from a direct donor to a 'strategic supplier,' where European allies purchase American weapons for Ukraine at their own expense. While this reorientation marks a significant change, it is far from the worst-case scenario for Ukraine. Instead, it represents a pragmatic and potentially more sustainable evolution of transatlantic burden-sharing, securing critical capabilities for Ukraine while invigorating the U.S. defense industrial base and recalibrating the nature of allied support. Support is still 'as long as it takes' but also 'at the others' expense.' This marks a departure from the traditional post-World War II donor-recipient model, particularly within the NATO alliance, towards a more transactional 'America First' approach. Future U.S. engagement in global security will likely be contingent upon tangible economic benefits and direct cost-sharing from allies. Such a shift could lead to a more predictable, albeit less altruistic, framework for security cooperation, where allies are compelled to demonstrate their commitment through direct financial contributions. This policy reorientation accelerates European strategic autonomy. While the immediate effect is Europe paying for U.S. weapons, the long-term implication is a forced impetus for greater European defense integration and self-sufficiency. European nations have already been increasing their defense spending and proactively planning for a future with less guaranteed U.S. aid. This new model, by making U.S. weapons available for purchase, encourages Europe to develop its own robust procurement mechanisms and potentially expand its own defense industrial base. Ukraine's most pressing and enduring need remains robust air defense against Russia's escalating missile and drone attacks. The U.S.-made Patriot air-defense system is critical, as it is one of the few systems capable of intercepting high-speed ballistic missiles. These systems are vital for protecting civilian infrastructure and population centers, which have been subjected to relentless Russian bombardment. A critical strategic reality for Ukraine is that not all American weapons are equally replaceable by European alternatives. While Europe is ramping up its own artillery production, the Patriot system's unique counter-ballistic missile capability makes it a requirement that only the U.S. can provide at scale. Europe, at the same time, has demonstrated a clear willingness and increasing capacity to shoulder a greater share of the burden. The European Union has already provided €165 billion in financial assistance and has launched an €800 billion Defense Readiness Plan. Frozen Russian sovereign assets may be used to finance what Ukraine needs. The shift to a foreign military sales model is explicitly intended to invigorate the U.S. defense industrial base. By integrating 'exportability features' into defense systems during the design phase, the U.S. seeks to advance its competitiveness abroad and potentially lower unit costs for both America and its allies. While the foreign military sales process has historically been slow and plagued by delivery backlogs, the new model offers a potential solution. Consistent, large-scale orders from European allies could provide the long-term contract certainty that the U.S. defense industry requires to invest significantly in surge capacity and overcome challenges. This transforms what was previously a 'drain' on American stockpiles, requiring replenishment at taxpayer expense, into a sustained stimulus for U.S. manufacturing, aligning with 'America First' economic principles. This shift is not merely about burden-sharing; it is about recapitalizing and modernizing the U.S. defense industrial base. While immediate fixes for current shortages remain challenging, this strategic reorientation creates a more sustainable industrial ecosystem. Trump's recent rhetoric marks a notable change from his earlier stance, which often appeared conciliatory toward Vladimir Putin. He has recognized that Russia, not Ukraine, is the core problem in negotiations, even threatening tariffs and sanctions on Russia and its trading partners if a peace deal is not reached within 50 days. The reality that Putin is not amenable to a quick 'deal' is now clear. There is now a crucial political opening for continued support to Ukraine, even if the funding mechanism changes. The narrative that Trump desires Ukraine's fall has been refuted. Instead, Trump is committed to ending the war on terms that align with his administration's interests. This represents a significant psychological advantage for Ukraine, as it lessens the fear of a complete U.S. abandonment.
10 minutes ago
Ukraine's Zelenskyy promises safeguards after street protests over a new anti-corruption law
KYIV, Ukraine -- Opponents of a new law they say strips Ukraine's anti-corruption watchdogs of their independence called for a third straight day of street protests across the country Thursday, despite President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's attempts to defuse the tension with promises of legislative safeguards. After meeting with the heads of Ukraine's key anti-corruption and security agencies, Zelenskyy promised to act on their recommendations by presenting a bill to Parliament that strengthens the rule of law. 'And very importantly: all the norms for the independence of anti-corruption institutions will be in place,' Zelenskyy said in his nightly video address late Wednesday. Zelenskyy acknowledged the controversy triggered by the new corruption law, which also drew rebukes from European Union officials and international rights groups. 'It's not falling on deaf ears,' Zelenskyy said of the complaints. 'We've analyzed all the concerns, all the aspects of what needs to be changed and what needs to be stepped up.' However, he didn't promise to revoke the law that he approved. The legislation that was adopted this week, despite pleas for Zelenskyy to veto it, tightened government oversight of two key anti-corruption agencies. Critics said the step could significantly weaken the independence of those agencies and give Zelenskyy's circle greater influence over investigations. The protests haven't called for Zelenskyy's ouster. But the first major anti-government demonstrations since the war began come at a tough time for Ukraine in its three-year battle to thwart Russia's invasion. Russia's bigger army is accelerating its efforts to pierce Ukraine's front-line defenses and is escalating its bombardment of Ukrainian cities. Ukraine is also facing a question mark over whether the United States will provide more military aid and whether European commitments can take up the slack, with no end to the war in sight. Delegations from Russia and Ukraine met in Istanbul for a third round of talks in as many months Wednesday. But once again the talks were brief and delivered no major breakthrough. Zelenskyy had insisted earlier Wednesday that the new legal framework was needed to crack down harder on corruption. Fighting entrenched corruption is crucial for Ukraine's aspirations to join the EU and maintain access to billions of dollars in Western aid in the war. 'Criminal cases should not drag on for years without verdicts, and those working against Ukraine must not feel comfortable or immune from punishment,' he said. Meanwhile, Russian planes dropped two powerful glide bombs on the center of Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city, on Thursday morning, regional Gov. Oleh Syniehubov said. At least 16 people were injured, including a 10-year-old girl who suffered an acute stress reaction, he said. The southern Ukrainian city of Odesa and Cherkasy in central Ukraine were also hit overnight, authorities said. The drone and missile strikes on the cities injured 11 people, including a 9-year-old, and damaged historic landmarks and residential buildings, officials said. Ukraine has sought to step up its own long-range drone attacks on Russia, using domestic technology and manufacturing. An overnight Ukrainian drone attack on the Russian Black Sea resort of Sochi killed two women and injured 11 other people, local authorities said Thursday.
Fox News
11 minutes ago
- Fox News
DOJ forms Russiagate 'strike force' to investigate declassified Obama-era evidence
Print Close By Brooke Singman Published July 24, 2025 The Justice Department has formed a "strike force" to assess the evidence publicized by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard relating to former President Obama and his top national security and intelligence officials' involvement in the origins of the Trump-Russia collusion narrative. The DOJ, on Wednesday evening, announced the formation of the "strike force," to investigate potential next legal steps which may stem from Gabbard's recent declassification of records suggesting that Obama administration officials "manufactured" intelligence to form the narrative that then-candidate Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to influence the 2016 presidential election. Justice Department officials told Fox News Digital that the DOJ takes the alleged weaponization of the intelligence community with "the utmost seriousness." A source familiar with the strike force told Fox News Digital that everything is being reviewed and that no serious lead is off the table. The source told Fox News Digital that the National Security Division of the Justice Department will "likely be involved in the investigation." BRENNAN DIRECTED PUBLICATION OF 'IMPLAUSIBLE' REPORTS CLAIMING PUTIN PREFERRED TRUMP IN 2016, HOUSE FOUND "The Department of Justice is proud to work with my friend Director Gabbard and we are grateful for her partnership in delivering accountability for the American people," Attorney General Pam Bondi said. "We will investigate these troubling disclosures fully and leave no stone unturned to deliver justice," she said. The strike force consists of teams made up of investigators and prosecutors that focus on "the worst offenders engaged in fraudulent activities, including, chiefly, health care fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, bank fraud, money laundering offenses, false statements offenses," and more, according to the DOJ. The formation of the strike force comes after a slew of developments related to the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation. RUSSIA SAT ON INTEL OF HILLARY CLINTON'S ALLEGED 'HEAVY TRANQUILIZERS' USE, NEW DOCS CLAIM Earlier this month, CIA Director John Ratcliffe sent a criminal referral for former CIA Director John Brennan to the FBI. The referral came after Ratcliffe declassified a "lessons learned" review of the creation of the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA). The 2017 ICA alleged Russia sought to influence the 2016 presidential election to help then-candidate Donald Trump. But the review found that the process of the ICA's creation was rushed with "procedural anomalies," and that officials diverted from intelligence standards. It also determined that the "decision by agency heads to include the Steele Dossier in the ICA ran counter to fundamental tradecraft principles and ultimately undermined the credibility of a key judgment." The dossier — an anti-Trump document filled with unverified and wholly inaccurate claims that was commissioned by Fusion GPS and paid for by Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's campaign and the DNC — has been widely discredited. Last week's review marks the first time career CIA officials have acknowledged politicization of the process by which the ICA was written, particularly by Obama-era political appointees. Records declassified as part of that review further revealed that Brennan did, in fact, push for the dossier to be included in the 2017 ICA. FBI Director Kash Patel received the criminal referral and opened an investigation into Brennan. Patel also opened a criminal investigation into former FBI Director James Comey. The full scope of the criminal investigations into Brennan and Comey is unclear, but two sources described the FBI's view of the duo's interactions as a "conspiracy," which could open up a wide range of potential prosecutorial options. The FBI and CIA declined to comment. Neither Brennan nor Comey immediately responded to Fox News Digital's request for comment. Days later, Gabbard declassified documents revealing "overwhelming evidence" that demonstrated how, after President Donald Trump won the 2016 election against Hillary Clinton, then-President Barack Obama and his national security team laid the groundwork for what would be the yearslong Trump–Russia collusion probe. OBAMA OFFICIALS ADMITTED THEY HAD NO 'EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE' OF TRUMP-RUSSIA COLLUSION: HOUSE INTEL TRANSCRIPTS Gabbard said the documents revealed that Obama administration officials "manufactured and politicized intelligence" to create the narrative that Russia was attempting to influence the 2016 presidential election, despite information from the intelligence community stating otherwise. The new documents name former President Barack Obama, top officials in his National Security Council, then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, then-CIA Director John Brennan, then-National Security Advisor Susan Rice, then-Secretary of State John Kerry, then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and then-Deputy FBI Director Andrew McCabe, among others. Gabbard, on Monday, sent a criminal referral to the Justice Department related to those findings. DOJ officials did not share further details on whom the criminal referral was for. And on Wednesday, Gabbard declassified documents that showed that the intelligence community did not have any direct information that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help elect Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election, but, at the "unusual" direction of then-President Barack Obama, published "potentially biased" or "implausible" intelligence suggesting otherwise. That information came from a report prepared by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence back in 2020. The report, which was based on an investigation launched by former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes, R-Calif., was dated Sept. 18, 2020. At the time of the publication of the report, Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., was the chairman of the committee. The report has never before been released to the public, and instead, has remained highly classified within the intelligence community. Meanwhile, Fox News Digital, in 2020, exclusively obtained the declassified transcripts from Obama-era national security officials' closed-door testimonies before the House Intelligence Committee, in which those officials testified that they had no "empirical evidence" of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia in the 2016 election, but continued to publicly push the "narrative" of collusion. The House Intelligence Committee, in 2017, conducted depositions of top Obama intelligence officials, including Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, among others. OBAMA DENIES TRUMP'S 'BIZARRE ALLEGATIONS' THAT HE WAS RUSSIAGATE 'RINGLEADER' IN RARE STATEMENT The officials' responses in the transcripts of those interviews align with the results of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller's investigation — which found no evidence of criminal coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia in 2016, while not reaching a determination on obstruction of justice. The transcripts, from 2017 and 2018, revealed top Obama officials were questioned by House Intelligence Committee lawmakers and investigators about whether they had or had seen evidence of such collusion, coordination or conspiracy — the issue that drove the FBI's initial case and later the special counsel probe. "I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election," Clapper testified in 2017. "That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence.... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence." Lynch also said she did "not recall that being briefed up to me." "I can't say that it existed or not," Lynch said, referring to evidence of collusion, conspiracy or coordination. But Clapper and Lynch, and then Vice President Joe Biden, were present in the Oval Office July 28, 2016, when Brennan briefed Obama and Comey on intelligence he'd received from one of Hillary Clinton's campaign foreign policy advisors "to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service." "We're getting additional insight into Russian activities from (REDACTED)," Brennan's handwritten notes, exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital in October 2020, read. "CITE (summarizing) alleged approved by Hillary Clinton a proposal from one of her foreign policy advisers to vilify Donald Trump by stirring up a scandal claiming interference by the Russian security service." Meanwhile, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power, according to the transcript of her interview to the House Intelligence Committee, was asked whether she had or saw any evidence of collusion or conspiracy. OBAMA ADMIN 'MANUFACTURED' INTELLIGENCE TO CREATE 2016 RUSSIAN ELECTION INTERFERENCE NARRATIVE, DOCUMENTS SHOW Power replied: "I am not in possession of anything — I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community." When asked again, she said: "I am not." Rice was asked the same question. "To the best of my recollection, there wasn't anything smoking, but there were some things that gave me pause," she said, according to her transcribed interview, in response to whether she had any evidence of conspiracy. "I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect that I saw… conspiracy prior to my departure." When asked whether she had any evidence of "coordination," Rice replied: "I don't recall any intelligence or evidence to that effect." Meanwhile, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe was not asked that specific question but rather questions about the accuracy and legitimacy of the unverified anti-Trump dossier compiled by ex-British intelligence officer Christopher Steele. McCabe was asked during his interview in 2017 what was the most "damning or important piece of evidence in the dossier that" he "now knows is true." McCabe replied: "We have not been able to prove the accuracy of all the information." "You don't know if it's true or not?" a House investigator asked, to which McCabe replied: "That's correct." OBAMA OFFICIALS USED DOSSIER TO PROBE, BRIEF TRUMP DESPITE KNOWING IT WAS UNVERIFIED 'INTERNET RUMOR' After Trump's 2016 victory and during the presidential transition period, Comey briefed Trump on the now-infamous anti-Trump dossier, containing salacious allegations of purported coordination between Trump and the Russian government. Brennan was present for that briefing, which took place at Trump Tower in New York City in January 2017. The dossier was authored by Steele. It was funded by Clinton's presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the law firm Perkins Coie. But Brennan and Comey knew of intelligence suggesting Clinton, during the campaign, was stirring up a plan to tie Trump to Russia, documents claim. It is unclear whether the intelligence community, at the time, knew that the dossier was paid for by Clinton and the DNC. The Obama-era officials have been mum on the new revelations, but a spokesman for Obama on Tuesday made a rare public statement. FBI LAUNCHES CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS OF JOHN BRENNAN, JAMES COMEY: DOJ SOURCES "Out of respect for the office of the presidency, our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response," Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said in a statement. "But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one." CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP "These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction," Obama's spokesman continued. "Nothing in the document issued last week undercuts the widely accepted conclusion that Russia worked to influence the 2016 presidential election but did not successfully manipulate any votes." He added: "These findings were affirmed in a 2020 report by the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio." Print Close URL
