Exclusive: The Pentagon's software-hardware tug of war
There's a balance to be struck between defense software and hardware; without one, your targeting's bricked, and without the other, you're not seizing airfields.
The problem is the Pentagon has yet to find the sweet spot.
Why it matters: In a world of robots, autonomous weapons and global supply chains, conflicts will be swayed by the team that refreshes its code quicker and shares its information more accurately.
A hypothetical war with China in 2027 will be fought with what the U.S. military hasin hand right now.
Driving the news: An Atlantic Council report — the product of more than a year of work and 60-plus interviews, first shared with Axios — sheds light on this era of " software-defined warfare."
Such a dynamic "is about ensuring we have sufficient numbers of systems, as technologically advanced as possible, at the moment of need," Stephen Rodriguez, the commission director, told me.
What's inside: Here are some of the commission's conclusions:
The U.S. military is still moored to an acquisition system "ill-suited to the rapid tempo of modern technological innovation." This status quo puts the country "at significant risk."
The Defense Department lacks "sufficient software expertise," hamstringing capabilities that harness "critical technology areas including AI, autonomy, and cyber." Training is needed all the way up the chain. Academia can help.
While long-term reform is necessary, what's needed today is "near-term, high-impact initiatives to bridge" the gap and "reestablish an advantage." Beijing, meanwhile, is aligning industrial policies and resources to the digital domain.
Stateside service chiefs should identify a program executive office to oversee how — and ensure that — disparate tech can communicate. This is Combined Joint All-Domain Command and Control in action.
The Defense Department should, by default, purchase software, not build it. When the department "decides to develop custom software, this often results in higher costs, longer schedules, and increased risks."
It also needs a software cadre, and that requires recruiting dozens of specialists to be spread far and wide, including at operational commands and in budget offices.
What they're saying: "DoD has made some decent progress on software adoption, but we're still doing it in siloed fiefdoms and not always with broader, more strategic outcomes in mind," Whitney McNamara, one of the report's authors, told Axios.
"Our software-enabled capabilities won't move the mark on the battlefield if they can't talk to one another."
Inside the room: The commissioners, contributors and staff are a who's who of industry, government and financiers. The roster includes:
Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet
Helsing cofounder Gundbert Scherf
Trae Stephens of Founders Fund and Anduril Industries fame
Saab executive and former Task Force 59 commodore Michael Brasseur
Adam Hammer at Roadrunner Venture Studios
Former Defense Secretary Mark Esper
Former Pentagon weapons buyer Ellen Lord
Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Jack Shanahan
Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Clinton Hinote
The bottom line: The Pentagon "buys metal well, because buying metal is an Industrial Age process. They perfectly define a requirement, then they spend years building the thing," Second Front CEO Tyler Sweatt, also a study commissioner, said in an interview.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
3 hours ago
- New York Post
The Pentagon secretly planted Area 51 UFO conspiracy theory to hide secret weapons program
Some of the most prevalent UFO conspiracy theories — including about aliens being housed a Area 51 in Nevada — were fueled by the Pentagon in an attempt to provide cover for secret weapons programs, according to a bombshell report. A review by the Department of Defense found that in the 1980s, an Air Force colonel visited a Nevada bar near Area 51 and gave the owner fabricated photos of flying saucers near the secret government base, according to a review of the 2024 report by the Wall Street Journal. The incident renewed local fervor over UFOs, with the now-retired colonel confessing to Pentagon investigators that he was on an official mission to spread disinformation and hide the true purpose of the site, where the government was testing the first-ever stealth warplane, the F-117 Nighthawk. 5 The Pentagon found that at the origin of some of the UFO conspiracy theories came from the Department of Defense itself, the details of which were kept out of last year's transparency report. AP 5 Several of the theories stemmed from the agency's need to keep its newly developed aircraft and weapons programs concealed near Area 51. AP The military reasoned that the best way to keep its new technology hidden from the Soviet Union's prying eye during the Cold War was to bury it amid the trove of conspiracy theories surrounding Area 51, investigators found. The incident is just one of several where government agencies allegedly played up America's UFO mythology for the purpose of protecting its military assets, according to the 2024 report. Other military attempts to obscure secret projects with conspiracy theories were not made public. Sean Kirkpatrick, the first director of the All-domain Anomaly Resolution Office (AARO), was the man tasked by the government to dissect countless UFO theories in 2022. As his office probed decades of documents, memos and messages across the Defense Department, he found several conspiracy theories that circled back to the Pentagon itself. 5 The report raises questions about new reports of UFOs released by the Pentagon, including this 2020 footage from Navy pilots. DoD/AFP via Getty Images 5 The Area 51 conspiracy theory was planted to hide the development of the F-117, the world's first stealth fighter jet. REUTERS In one instance, Kirkpatrick's team found that the Air Force hazed members with briefings introducing them to a fake 'Yankee Blue' unit that purported investigated alien aircraft. The briefings came with a direct order never to mention the details to anyone, with many of the targets of the prank never learning it was all a ruse, according to interviews with Kirkpatrick's team. The bizarre practice was still taking place during the investigation, with the Pentagon eventually sending an order across the DOD in 2023 to finally put an end to it. It remains unclear why officials presented subordinates with the fake briefings, with rumors speculating it could have been used as a loyalty test or to spread misinformation. Kirkpatrick also found that the government deliberately left people in the dark when they witnessed secret military projects, according to the WSJ. Robert Salas, a former Air Force captain, was one of those people. Salas claims he witnessed a UFO descend over a nuclear missile testing site in Montana in 1967. During the event, a flashing light was able to disable all 10 nuclear missiles at the bunker, along with all electrical systems. 5 One the rumors stemmed from years of officers hazing subordinates about the existence of a supposed UFO program, a well-known practice the Pentagon put a stop to in 2023. AP He was ordered to never discuss what he saw, with Salas maintaining that he witnessed alien visitors chiming in on the Cold War. Kirkpatrick's team, however, discovered that Salas was never told that what he actually saw was a test of a fledging electromagnetic pulse test to see if American silos could withstand the radiation of atomic weapons and retaliate if the Soviet Union ever attacked first. With the test failing, officials decided that it was best no one knew the secret of the vulnerability, so Salas and the other witnesses were intentionally left in the dark to make their own conclusions. The DOD has acknowledged that not everything has been made public about the AARO's discoveries, but the military claims it will be more transparent in its follow up report scheduled for later this year. 'The department is committed to releasing a second volume of its Historical Record Report, to include AARO's findings on reports of potential pranks and inauthentic materials,' the DOD said in a statement.
Atlantic
3 hours ago
- Atlantic
Trump Means to Provoke, Not Pacify
President Donald Trump is about to launch yet another assault on democracy, the Constitution, and American traditions of civil-military relations, this time in Los Angeles. Under a dubious legal rationale, he is activating 2,000 members of the National Guard to confront protests against actions by ICE, the immigration police who have used thuggish tactics against citizens and foreigners alike in the United States. By militarizing the situation in L.A., Trump is goading Americans more generally to take him on in the streets of their own cities, thus enabling his attacks on their constitutional freedoms. As I've listened to him and his advisers over the past several days, they seem almost eager for public violence that would justify the use of armed force against Americans. The president and the men and women around him are acting with great ambition in this moment, and they are likely hoping to achieve three goals in one dramatic action. First, they will turn America's attention away from Trump's many failures and inane feuds, and reestablish his campaign persona as a strongman who will brush aside the law if that's what it takes to keep order in the streets. Perhaps nothing would please Trump more than to replace weird stories about Elon Musk with video of masked protesters burning cars as lines of helmeted police and soldiers march over them and impose draconian silence in one of the nation's largest and most diverse cities. Second, as my colleague David Frum warned this morning, Trump is establishing that he is willing to use the military any way he pleases, perhaps as a proof of concept for suppressing free elections in 2026 or 2028. Trump sees the U.S. military as his personal honor guard and his private muscle. Those are his toy soldiers, and he's going to get a show from his honor guard in a birthday parade next weekend. In the meantime, he's going to flex that muscle, and prove that the officers and service members who will do whatever he orders are the real military. The rest are suckers and losers. During the George Floyd protests in 2020, Trump was furious at what he saw as the fecklessness of military leaders determined to thwart his attempts to use deadly force against protesters. He's learned his lesson: This time, he has installed a hapless sycophant at the Pentagon who is itching to execute the boss's orders. Third, he may be hoping to radicalize the citizen-soldiers drawn from the community who serve in the National Guard. (Seizing the California Guard is also a convenient way to humiliate California Governor Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, with Trump's often-used narrative that liberals can't control their own cities.) The president has the right to 'federalize' Guard forces, which is how they were deployed overseas in America's various conflicts. Trump has never respected the traditions of American civil-military relations, which regard the domestic deployment of the military as an extreme measure to be avoided whenever possible. Using the Guard could be a devious tactic: He may be hoping to set neighbor against neighbor, so that the people called to duty return to their home and workplace with stories of violence and injuries. In the longer run, Trump may be trying to create a national emergency that will enable him to exercise authoritarian control. (Such an emergency was a rationalization, for example, for the tariffs that he has mostly had to abandon.) He has for years been trying to desensitize the citizens of the United States to un-American ideas and unconstitutional actions. The American system of government was never meant to cope with a rogue president. Yet Trump is not unstoppable. Thwarting his authoritarianism will require restraint on the part of the public, some steely nerves on the part of state and local authorities, and vigilant action from national elected representatives, who should be stepping in to raise the alarm and to demand explanations about the president's misuse of the military. As unsatisfying as it may be for some citizens to hear, the last thing anyone should do is take to the streets of Los Angeles and try to confront the military or any of California's law-enforcement authorities. ICE is on a rampage, but physically assaulting or obstructing its agents—and thus causing a confrontation with the cops who have to protect them, whether those police officers like it or not—will provide precisely the pretext that some of the people in Trump's White House are trying to create. The president and his coterie want people walking around taking selfies in gas clouds, waving Mexican flags, holding up traffic, and burning cars. Judging by reactions on social media and interviews on television, a lot of people seem to think such performances are heroic—which means they're poised to give Trump's enforcers what they're hoping for. Be warned: Trump is expecting resistance. You will not be heroes. You will be the pretext. Conor Friedersdorf: Averting the worst-case scenario in Los Angeles Instead, the most dramatic public action the citizens of Southern California could take right now would be to ensure that Trump's forces arrive on calm streets. Imagine the reactions of the Guard members as they look around and wonder what, exactly, the commander in chief was thinking. Why are they carrying their rifles in the streets of downtown America? What does anyone expect them to do? Put another way: What if the president throws a crackdown and nobody comes? This kind of restraint will deny Trump the political oxygen he's trying to generate. He is resorting to the grand theater of militarism because he is losing on multiple fronts in the courts—and he knows it. The law, for most people, is dreary to hear about, but one of the most important stories of Trump's second term is that lawyers and judges are so far holding a vital line against the administration, sometimes at great personal risk. Trump is also losing public support, which is another reason he's zeroing in on California. He is resolutely ignorant in many ways, but he has an excellent instinct for picking the right fights. The fact of the matter is that tens of millions of Americans believe that almost everything about immigration in the United States has long been deeply dysfunctional. (I'm one of them.) If he sends the military into L.A. and Guard members end up clashing in high-definition video with wannabe resistance gladiators in balaclavas, many people who have not been paying attention to his other ghastly antics will support him. (For the record, I am not one of them.) So far, even the Los Angeles Police Department—not exactly a bastion of squishy suburban book-club liberals—has emphasized that the protests have been mostly peaceful. Trump is apparently trying to change that. Sending in the National Guard is meant to provoke, not pacify, and his power will only grow if he succeeds in tempting Americans to intemperate reactions that give him the authoritarian opening he's seeking.
Axios
3 hours ago
- Axios
Gina Ortiz Jones says there's no time to waste as San Antonio mayor
San Antonio mayor-elect Gina Ortiz Jones tells Axios she's not waiting to be sworn in to start tackling issues like a potential new Spurs arena, an expected budget deficit and the impact of Trump administration policies. Why it matters: The nonpartisan mayor's race became distinctly about politics as it drew money and influence from across Texas and the country. Now that it's over, Ortiz Jones must tackle the reality of everyday issues facing a city on the cusp of pivotal changes. Catch up quick: Ortiz Jones, who had national Democratic backing, beat out Republican Rolando Pablos 54% to 46%, cementing San Antonio as a reliably blue city. The big picture: Ortiz Jones will lead San Antonio at a critical time, as officials seek to gain public support for a new downtown Spurs arena that could be surrounded by a sports and entertainment district. Voters could be asked to weigh in on the project as soon as November. She will also lead the city through the remaining years of the Trump administration, under which San Antonio has lost millions of dollars in federal funding. The city is also expecting a budget deficit. What they're saying: "There's no time to waste, and I'm not going to wait until I am actually in the seat, because I think there's a lot of work and conversations we can have now that will be helpful to ensure (it's) as smooth a transition as possible," Ortiz Jones told Axios on Saturday. When asked about how she can get things done on a City Council poised to have a starker political divide, she said "I think there's going to be a lot that we can agree on ... I'm quite confident that we'll get to six (votes)." State of play: Ortiz Jones, who is the first openly gay woman elected San Antonio mayor, served as the Air Force undersecretary in the Biden administration and was twice the Democratic nominee for the 23rd Congressional District. She grew up on San Antonio's Far West Side. Between the lines: Pablos and his supporters appeared to both outraise and outspend Ortiz Jones in the runoff election, campaign finance reports show. Pablos got a big boost from the Texas Economic Fund, a political action committee run by Republican Gov. Greg Abbott's former political director. Ortiz Jones had help from Fields of Change, a national Democratic PAC, and Emily's List. The bottom line: Ortiz Jones, who takes office June 18, says it was her personal background that helped her break through a crowded mayoral field.
