Quick Tanks: The Best of Long-Form Defense Analysis, Briefly
A weekly review of the long-form content from the national security policy, defense policy, and related technology analysis community.
Good afternoon, defense enthusiasts.
This week, I have another set of insightful reports that should pique your interest. The topics include:
Opportunities for the US government to use commercial space services, instead of relying on owned systems
The current trends in the DoD’s development and recruitment of digital talent
An in-depth examination of the political, technological, economic, military, sociocultural, and non-traditional security factors contributing to rising tensions in the Taiwan Strait
Quick Tanks is a weekly collection and summary of the latest long-form analytic content on the topics of US defense, force structure, innovation, and policy considerations. We strive to aggregate all of the key sources of analysis and present brief, neutral summaries to help keep you informed. Should you feel inclined to learn more about any study, please reference the full report via the links provided.
The sponsor of the newsletter is the Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts + Technology.
Tank you for sharing and subscribing, and happy reading.
Buy before You Build
A Decision Framework for Purchasing Commercial Space Services
By Peter Cunniffe, Megan Lewis & Bryan Clark
Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts + Technology
Link to PDF; Link to Report Page
Focus: The report assesses opportunities for the US government's use of commercial space services in communications, sensing, launch, and in-space logistics, and it identifies barriers limiting the adoption of commercial services.Analysis: The authors assess venture funding, company offerings, government space budgets, and acquisition processes. They compare costs and capabilities of commercial versus government systems, and interview commercial space startups on government barriers.Argument: Commercial space services can augment or replace government systems, providing faster delivery of advanced capabilities at lower cost. However, institutional hurdles currently hinder the realization of these benefits.Insights: Commercial SATCOM (satellite communications) services now exceed the capabilities of military systems at a much lower cost per bit. As a proof of concept, strategic partnerships like NASA's Commercial Crew and Cargo program successfully stimulated the development of commercial services for the ISS.Recommendations: The DoD should establish a framework to determine when agencies should buy commercial services over government systems. Moreover, it should expand the use of strategic partnerships to develop commercial services to meet government needs. In addition, Congress should enable agencies to shift funds from procurement to service purchases.The explosive growth of commercial space ventures presents unprecedented opportunities for the US government to obtain space capabilities as on-demand services rather than owned systems. One glaring statistic is that in FY2023, the US government will spend approximately $36 billion to develop and acquire space systems and associated ground infrastructure; in contrast, at most $5 billion will be spent on commercial space services. Considering such disproportion, this report from Hudson Institute’s Center for Defense Concepts & Technology examines the burgeoning global commercial space industry and provides targeted recommendations for how government agencies can dismantle existing barriers and maximize the utilization of commercial solutions.
The report highlights the proliferation of global broadband internet, IoT tracking, space data relay, and other commercial SATCOM services enabled by new low-cost satellite constellations in low Earth orbit. It notes how the DoD could augment or replace expensive, slow-to-field military SATCOM systems with commercial services that are more resilient and incorporate the latest technology faster. In fact, NASA is already transitioning from government-owned to commercial solutions for space data relay.
”Instead of buying additional WGS satellites or continuing the development of PTS, the Space Force could purchase commercial services from existing GEO SATCOM operators or newer LEO constellations like Starlink and Kuiper. Starlink has proven the capabilities and resilience of commercial LEO constellations even in a contested warfighting environment. After Russia attempted to jam and hack Starlink, SpaceX operators modified Starlink software to counter the attacks. Ukrainian troops continue to use Starlink to connect troops on the battlefield, including coordinating artillery strikes with drone observations (figure 9). Though Russia has threatened to attack commercial satellites, it would be challenging to neutralize enough satellites to make a difference in constellations of hundreds or thousands. Seizing this business opportunity, SpaceX announced in late 2022 a variant of Starlink called Starshield for national security customers. An additional option for resilient wideband SATCOM is leasing dedicated GEO satellites. For example, a constellation of a dozen Astranis relocatable MicroGEO satellites could provide global wideband surge capacity at a lower cost than the procurement of a single WGS satellite.”
In remote sensing, the report describes how commercial providers offer a range of valuable services from imagery to weather forecasting and space domain awareness. For instance, readily available commercial imaging supports military operations by furnishing supplemental capacity alongside classified systems. Commercial systems also enable the timely sharing of unclassified imagery with key allies and partners such as Ukraine, whose access to space-based ISR has proven decisive against Russia.
For launch and in-space logistics, the report highlights the variety of transportation, servicing, manufacturing, and other services emerging from companies like SpaceX, Blue Origin, Sierra Space, and Axiom Space. It notes how NASA has successfully employed public-private partnerships to develop commercial cargo and crew transportation services for the International Space Station. Additionally, commercial solutions could augment or replace government systems for applications like space domain awareness, rapid launch, and active debris removal.
“This public-private partnership approach—with NASA serving as the strategic partner, investor, and anchor tenant for commercial services—has been a remarkable success. Commercial Crew and Cargo services were developed at a fraction of the cost of a traditional NASA program—and likely faster. NASA reports that it funded less than half the development costs of the SpaceX and Orbital Sciences (now Northrop Grumman) cargo transport systems. Furthermore, NASA estimates that a traditional NASA-run program would have cost up to 10 times more than SpaceX spent to develop the Falcon 9 launch vehicle. Both the SpaceX and Northrop Grumman cargo services were operational within six years after NASA contract award. NASA Commercial Cargo funding also helped fund development of the Falcon 9, now the workhorse of SpaceX’s market-leading commercial launch business.”
The report notes the specific barriers hindering further government use of commercial space services and their respective recommendations, pictured in the table below:
To fully understand the transformative potential of commercial space services for national security, as well as the challenges impeding greater government adoption, I highly recommend readers examine the full report.
DoD’s Emerging Digital Workforce
A Follow-on Report to the DOD’s Hidden AI workforce
By Diana Gehlhaus, Ron Hodge and Jonathan Rotner
Center for Security and Emerging Technologies
Link to PDF; Link to Report Page
Focus: The report provides an update on the DoD's digital workforce trends across the services since 2021.Analysis: Interviews with over 25 individuals across 16 DoD organizations to document initiatives, challenges, and recommendations related to digital talent management.Argument: There is significant divergence across the services in how digital talent is defined, identified, developed, and promoted, yet common challenges remain. Services are at different levels of maturity in their digital talent readiness, which could make joint technology and missions more difficult.Insights: Promising pockets of progress exist in identifying talent, forming digital teams, and providing training, but systemic coordination is still lacking to fully leverage talent. For example, career fields and experience identifiers lack common criteria, data-driven talent ID is uneven, and ownership of digital talent initiatives is fragmented.Recommendations: DOD should convene digital talent enthusiasts to share best practices and lessons learned, and OSD should coordinate enterprise analytics, create maturity assessments, and develop a common lexicon.As the US military enters a new digital era, the DoD faces an urgent talent challenge: developing skilled professionals in data science, software engineering, and artificial intelligence. This report from the Center for Security and Emerging Technology analyzes initiatives across the services aimed at cultivating this high-demand "digital talent." The study offers key insights into the military's ongoing quest to build a workforce equipped for 21st-century warfare.
The study identifies five key trends in how the five services are identifying, developing, and managing personnel with digital skills:
There is little consistency in the criteria for career fields, codes, and titles related to digital talent.
Prioritization of tracking and analyzing these specialized skills varies widely.
While pockets of promising experimentation with recruiting and maintaining digital talent exist, there is no centralized sharing of lessons learned.
There is consensus on the need for universal training in "digital fluency," but there is less alignment on defining fluency and on the scale and availability of such training.
Inconsistent organizational ownership over digital talent management makes coordination and service-level comparison difficult.
“There has been an observed rise in opportunities for general data and AI education and training across the services. For example, services are embracing the CDAO’s senior executive AI training. Services are also starting to offer access to courses for those who wish to upskill on their own time (such as the Army’s Data 101 course or online courses offered through the Air Force’s Digital University).
However, the availability of and enrollment in these opportunities remains uneven. One reason relates to Trend 2 and the uneven prioritization of digital talent. For example, DOD must decide how to integrate the necessary digital workforce training into the existing demands on a service member’s time. Other difficult questions center around what a suitable baseline for universal fluency looks like, and what the right balance is between upskilling data and digital talent in-house versus supplying that needed talent through civilian contractors. Yet another unaddressed issue is the inconsistent usage of the terms “data fluency” and “digital fluency” and the lack of a clear definition for each. The USSF, for example, is focused on digital fluency, while the Army focuses on data fluency.”
Behind these trends, common challenges around people, processes, and technology persist. Misaligned incentives hinder the adoption of digital capabilities, as traditional career paths fail to offer clear advancement for technical talent, contributing to talent attrition. Moreover, gaps in mentorship and ambivalent leadership reinforce the obstacles. In addition, inflexible processes pose additional hurdles, from the reluctance to adjust personnel billets to a lack of incentives for middle management to embrace change and risk-taking. Meanwhile, shortfalls in critical data infrastructure continue to impede progress.
To overcome these multifaceted barriers, the report recommends the DoD take steps to convene the services, provide an enterprise-wide perspective, and harmonize best practices for managing this all-important talent pool.
The message is clear: to succeed in the digital age, military leaders must place developing and empowering technical talent among their top priorities. For anyone interested in the future of America's defense workforce, this CSET report provides an indispensable overview of today's landscape and the persistent challenges the Pentagon must tackle. I strongly recommend reading the full study.
A Perfect Storm
Managing Conflict in the Taiwan Strait
By Hon. Randall G. Schriver
Project 2049
Link to PDF; Link to Report Page
Focus: The report provides an in-depth examination of the political, technological, economic, military, sociocultural, and non-traditional security factors contributing to rising tensions in the Taiwan Strait. Moreover, the report analyzes opportunities to expand US policy options to support Taiwan.Analysis: The report's strategic analysis uses a historical overview, policy developments, public opinion data, and think tank recommendations.Argument: The US should develop and execute a concrete cross-governmental strategy for deterring a Chinese attack on Taiwan and defeating aggression if deterrence fails. This requires expanding near- and long-term policies available, as the current escalating threat environment necessitates a holistic approach beyond the long-held "strategic ambiguity."Insights: The report identifies six key factors shaping the escalating tensions in the Taiwan Strait: China's political coercion and propaganda, IP theft and technological advancement, economic coercion and supply chain control, military buildup and aggression, the emergence of Taiwanese national identity, and human rights violations and influence over international institutions.Recommendations: The US government should improve alliance management mechanisms with Taiwan, promote Taiwan's participation in international fora, strengthen economic ties through trade agreements, enhance military deterrence posture in the region, build sociocultural resilience among Taiwan's populace, and counter China's malign influence over international institutions by involving Taiwan.As political, technological, economic, military, socio-cultural, and non-traditional security factors converge, the US finds itself in the midst of a perfect storm regarding policy toward Taiwan. This Project 2049 report offers a comprehensive analysis of the multifaceted challenges shaping this increasingly volatile flashpoint. With tensions rapidly escalating, the report makes an urgent call for the US to rethink and expand its strategic approach across all dimensions of the cross-Strait relationship.
On the political front, Beijing continues to isolate Taiwan through coercive policies and restrict its participation in international organizations like the UN and WHO. However, Taiwan remains a flourishing democracy committed to the rule of law, in stark contrast to China's authoritarianism. The report urges the US to establish formal alliance management mechanisms with Taiwan, creatively promote Taiwan's meaningful participation in international affairs, and strengthen regional cooperation regarding Taiwan.
In science and technology, Taiwan serves as a critical partner for the US, pioneering advancements in semiconductors, space technology, and more. However, Taiwan faces mounting threats from China's intellectual property theft, civil-military fusion initiatives, and development of counter-space capabilities. The report calls for fully utilizing the US-Taiwan Science and Technology Agreement to expand cooperation, particularly in semiconductors, space technology, and ethical norms in cyberspace.
Economically, Taiwan is an indispensable cog in global technology supply chains, especially as a leading semiconductor manufacturer. However, Taiwan faces threats of overt coercion and economic warfare from Beijing. The report advocates for Taiwan's inclusion in economic initiatives like the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and for negotiating a comprehensive US-Taiwan Free Trade Agreement.
“The Biden administration sent a mixed message to Taiwan as well as U.S. allies and partners when it excluded Taiwan from the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF). Launched May 23, 2022, IPEF is the administration’s first major trade and economic initiative in the region. It designates four areas of cooperation: digital trade and trade facilitation, clean energy and decarbonization, supply chain resilience, and anti-corruption and taxes. Twelve Indo-Pacific nations were named as the initial partners during the launch.
A bipartisan group of 52 Senators urged the Biden administration to include Taiwan as a partner in IPEF prior to the launch, but their recommendation was ignored. Taiwan’s exclusion runs counter to official U.S. policy that ‘the United States will continue to support Taiwan’s membership in international organizations where statehood is not a requirement and encourage Taiwan’s meaningful participation in organizations where its membership is not possible.’ The snub also falls short of the administration’s own policy of integrated deterrence — a policy it claims to promote in its relationship with Taiwan. What’s more, Taiwan’s exclusion reinforces the CCP’s narrative that Washington does not attach significant importance to its relationship with Taiwan.”
Militarily, Taiwan seeks to deter Chinese aggression but is hampered by limited, sporadic US arms sales and unclear American security commitments. The report recommends joint military planning, rotating US troop deployments in Taiwan, establishing a war reserve stockpile on the island, and creating a senior body to guide defense-industrial cooperation.
Socio-culturally, Taiwan possesses a vibrant, democratic national identity that is rapidly diverging from mainland China's authoritarian ethos, and decades of Taiwanese self-determination contradict Beijing's claims of inevitability. To strengthen people-to-people ties, the US should increase domestic awareness of Taiwan's many contributions and establish a national committee on US-Taiwan relations.
In non-traditional security, Taiwan's exclusion from the World Health Organization vividly demonstrates Beijing's growing disruptive influence over international institutions. Taiwan's marginalization endangers global health governance and pandemic preparedness. However, Taiwan has proven itself a capable leader in disaster relief, public health, and human rights despite its diplomatic isolation. The report advocates for innovative ways to incorporate Taiwan into humanitarian and health partnerships.
“While the United States and Taiwan have maintained an unofficial relationship for over 40 years, the vast majority of Americans are unaware of the depth, breadth, and importance of this relationship. More than 580,000 Taiwanese Americans live in the United States, making significant contributions to the U.S. economy and American culture. U.S. exports to Taiwan support over 200,000 American jobs. Taiwan is the sixth largest source of visitors to the United States from the entire Indo-Pacific region. In 2019 alone, more than half a million Taiwanese visitors came to the United States, boosting local economies and strengthening the U.S. tourism industry. Taiwanese students are the seventh largest group of international students in the United States, and they bring unique perspectives and expertise to our universities and other academic institutions.
Taiwan’s contributions go far beyond these demographic measures, however. Since the closure of Confucius Institutes across the nation, Taiwan has stepped in to fill the gap of Mandarin language training in the United States. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Taiwan sent millions of masks and medical supplies to the United States to support its frontline workers. These are only a few of the many ways in which Taiwan continues to contribute significantly to the United States. However, due to the unofficial nature of the U.S.-Taiwan relationship, Taiwan’s contributions often go unnoticed or underappreciated by the American public. It is crucial that Taiwan’s positive and substantive impact on the United States be better recognized moving forward. This can be facilitated, in part, by improving communication and coordinating public messaging between the two nations.”
With cross-strait tensions reaching unprecedented heights, the US must expand the scope of its policy options regarding Taiwan. This report provides a comprehensive blueprint for strengthening the overall US-Taiwan relationship across all dimensions. I urge interested readers should examine the full report for its insightful analysis and policy recommendations.