The company chose a space next door to Redstone Arsenal, Alabama, home to the program office and testing and development for Army aviation, in 2021 and designed and built a facility intended to produce large numbers of the drones.

“The work we have done to date, not only with the development of the vehicle, but preparing for major acquisition and production of these vehicles, has been a huge focus for us,” Cummings said. “We’re really excited that we are now at manufacturing readiness level 7.”

The classification equates to a defined production workflow at the facility and the establishment of work instructions for building the air vehicles.

Hellhound, weighing less than 25 pounds, flew faster than 350 miles per hour at full throttle while passing distances of 20 kilometers using just 50% of its fuel, according to the company.

The air vehicle is the first major end-to-end weapon system developed by Cummings Aerospace, a Native American woman-owned small business founded in 2009 as an aerospace engineering outfit with expertise in design, development, production and sustainment of capabilities, including missiles, radars and command-and-control system technologies.

Hellhound will be demonstrated in several upcoming events with special operations, the U.S. Navy and even abroad in the U.K. this summer, according to Cummings.

“We’re using these demo opportunities, in addition to our flight tests, to ultimately execute low-rate production,” Cummings said. “We’re talking about quantities of 12 to 14 vehicles for these demos,” she added, “but it’s really allowing us to fully vet our production process.”

The military is changing the way it acquires weapon systems and, in many cases, requires companies to prove they can build systems at scale as part of competitive acquisitions. Historically, a weapon system might be chosen for its performance on the battlefield without much attention paid to the amount of work it would take to build a system or even how stable the supplier base was.

Cummings Aerospace wrapped up flight tests of its turbo-jet-powered, 3D-printed kamikaze drone earlier this year and is readying the S3 version of its man-portable Hellhound for submission to the U.S. Army’s Low Altitude Stalking and Striking Ordnance, or LASSO, competition set to kick off later this year.

The competition would require the company to build 135 munitions total and would expect companies chosen to build 35 prototypes right out of the gate.

In Cumming’s opinion, the war in Ukraine and tensions in the Indo-Pacific have underscored the need to ensure production capacity and understand the supply chain and its risks.

“That’s what’s driven the whole modular design and making sure that we have an open systems architecture and be able to swap in technologies very readily,” Cummings said.

A large portion of the air vehicle is made using commercially available 3D printers in-house and buying commercially available standard parts that are not unique to just a few suppliers, Cummings said.

“If you think about low-cost solutions — that’s part of the strategy — is we have to design something that we can get screws from multiple vendors, we can get 3D print material from multiple vendors,” she said. “We talk about exquisite payloads, that’s a different challenge, but electronics, we have to make sure we can source them from multiple vendors.”

And to surge even further, Cummings said there are other solutions that are easy to implement like licensing the design to other suppliers to go and produce using standard 3D printers to help expand production capacity.

For the Huntsville facility, Cummings said her goal is to produce at least 100 air vehicles a month.

“Payloads obviously drive some of that,” she noted, but added that there is room to grow beyond that, whether it’s next door or using the supplier base to ramp up demand.

The expectation now is “not just a new, novel technology or capability, but prove that you can make it,” Cummings said. “So we’re proving we can make them and make them at scale.”

Pituffik Space Base commander Col. Susan Meyers was removed from command “for loss of confidence in her ability to lead,” the Space Force said in a statement Thursday evening.

“Commanders are expected to adhere to the highest standards of conduct, especially as it relates to remaining nonpartisan in the performance of their duties,” the Space Force said.

Military.com reported Thursday that Meyers sent an email to Pituffik personnel on March 31, days after Vance’s visit to the base, that seemed intended to foster solidarity between U.S. service members and personnel stationed there from other countries, including Denmark and Greenland.

“I do not presume to understand current politics, but what I do know is the concerns of the U.S. administration discussed by Vice President Vance on Friday are not reflective of Pituffik Space Base,” Meyers reportedly wrote.

Meyers also reportedly wrote that over the weekend, she thought a great deal about “the actions taken, the words spoken [during Vance’s visit], and how it must have affected each of you.”

Meyers pledged in the message that as long as she is in charge of the base, “all of our flags will fly proudly — together.”

Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell retweeted Military.com’s story on the email and added a screenshot of the announcement of Meyers’ firing.

“Actions to undermine the chain of command or to subvert President Trump’s agenda will not be tolerated at the Department of Defense,” Parnell wrote on X.

In his second term, President Donald Trump has intensified his desire to take control of Greenland, a semi-autonomous territory partially governed by Denmark. Greenland is strategically located, and has significant resource reserves including oil, natural gas, minerals and rare earth elements.

In his March 28 visit to Pituffik, Vance rankled Danish allies by alleging “Denmark hasn’t done a good job at keeping Greenland safe.”

“Our message to Denmark is very simple: You have not done a good job by the people of Greenland,” Vance said. “You have underinvested in the people of Greenland and you have underinvested in the security architecture of this incredible, beautiful landmass filled with incredible people. That has to change.”

Danish Foreign Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen made his displeasure with Vance’s comments known in a video on social media later that day.

“We are open to criticism,” Rasmussen said. “But … we do not appreciate the tone in which it’s being delivered. This is not how you speak to your close allies, and I still consider Denmark and the United States to be close allies.”

Rasmussen said Denmark and Greenland remain open to discussing a greater U.S. military presence in Greenland.

Meyers became commander of the installation and the 821st Space Base Group in July 2024.

Col. Shawn Lee is now in command of the base, the service said. Meyers was fired by Col. Kenneth Klock, commander of Space Base Delta 1 at Peterson Space Force Base in Colorado.

The federal office expects to sign the contract for the ground-to-air missile batteries in the third quarter of 2025, with procurement taking place as part of the European Sky Shield Initiative, Armasuisse said in a statement.

Swiss lawmakers last year approved a credit guarantee of 660 million Swiss francs ($809 million) for medium-range air defense in the 2024 armament program. Switzerland joins countries across Europe rushing to bolster their air defenses, as Russia’s daily missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities have raised awareness of the need to protect civilian and military targets against aerial threats.

“The future ground-based air defense will contribute to the impact of maintaining air sovereignty and air defense as well as protecting against attacks with long-range weapons,” Armasuisse said. The system will be part of Switzerland’s integrated air defense, the office said.

Armasuisse tested Hensoldt’s TRML-4D radar for the new medium-range air-defense system between March 31 and April 11, taking a further step in the procurement process, the office said.

The properties of the radar were tested together with Diehl and Hensoldt in the specific Swiss topography, with the radar used to detect aircraft including the PC-12, F/A-18 and helicopters, Armasuisse said.

Switzerland is one of the most mountainous countries in Europe, with mountains covering 70% of the territory and around a quarter of the surface area made up of peaks over 2,000 meters (6,562 feet) above sea level.

The tests also investigated the frequency compatibility with civilian systems such as weather radar.

The country in October joined the European Sky Shield Initiative as the program’s 15th member, with an initial focus on medium-range air defense, while saying it expected opportunities for cooperation on shorter and longer-range defenses in the future.

Other IRIS-T SLM users include Germany and Ukraine, while Latvia ordered the system in November 2023 and Slovenia and Bulgaria placed orders last year. A system typically includes a fire-control unit, a radar unit and multiple missile launchers.

“The renewal will close an existing gap in capability in the defense of stand-off weapons, to combat approaching targets at a medium distance and thus expand long-range ground-based air defense with the Patriot system,” Armasuisse said. “Systems currently in use will soon reach the end of their useful life.”

Separately, Diehl said it signed a partnership agreement with Denmark’s MDSI to expand the payload integration of IRIS-T short-range missiles on fighter aircraft. The missile is included in the standard armament of the Eurofighter and Saab’s Gripen, and can also be used on the F-16, Tornado, EF-18, KF-21 and F-5E, according to Diehl.

“By partnering with MDSI, we’re enabling air forces to leverage the full potential of our missile system across platforms previously deemed as of limited compatibility,” said Martin Walzer, senior manager for integration programs at Diehl.

Earlier this spring, the test unit launched a handful of unmanned vessels from Aqaba, Jordan, into the Red Sea with a broad-edged surveillance mission: to observe the “pattern of life” in the region and increase maritime domain awareness.

These particular drone boats, however, were equipped with technology — the details of which the Navy is not disclosing — to allow them to navigate independently of GPS in the case of hostile efforts to disrupt or block signals from satellites.

The boats, which fit in the category of Small Unmanned Surface Vessel, or SUSV, meaning they’re less than 14 feet long, are stress-testing tech that may someday be used by the Navy wherever there is a threat of malicious disruption.

“There’s certain waterways here in Fifth Fleet that are GPS-contested — you can’t just transit there [with] a regular GPS, because the GPS will show you elsewhere, so your position is not accurate,” Lt. Luis Echeverria, commanding officer of the Navy’s Bahrain-based Task Group 59.1, told Military Times in an interview. “So, there is a payload embedded onto this small USV that allows for the USV to understand its actual position while it’s being jammed.”

Task Group 59.1, nicknamed “The Pioneers,” activated in January 2024 under Echeverria’s command. While the Navy’s Task Force 59, also located in Manama, Bahrain, has a broader mission focused on integrating unmanned systems and AI into surface operations, the task group zooms in on manned-unmanned teaming, and tests a variety of drone boat technologies for possible further development or employment.

That many of these technologies are commercial innovations and prototypes that the Navy hasn’t yet invested in means unit officials must be delicate about the details they disclose to avoid the appearance of endorsement.

The vessels deployed in the Red Sea, for example, are most likely variants of the Saildrone Voyager USV, a platform that has participated in Navy testing for several years.

“Saildrone’s innovative solution leverages multiple forms of localization, ensuring seamless operation without relying exclusively on satellite systems, and allowing operations to continue in contested environments,” company officials said in a March release highlighting the platform’s new GPS-denied technology.

Following the systems’ test deployment, Echeverria’s unit will develop an after-action report with insights into successes and failures and recommendations for the fleet. As the Navy continues to experiment toward the end of finding a meaningful and permanent place for unmanned vessels alongside and in concert with its manned ships, this task group aims to keep the service from investing in tech that’s not ready or can’t meet the mission.

When the unit first stood up it was tasked with deploying Seasats’ autonomous surface vessel Lightfish into the Red Sea with some untested deception capabilities, Echeverria told an audience earlier this year at the Surface Navy Association’s annual symposium.

“We failed. But that was fine, because there are good failures, and this was a good failure. We failed quickly,” Echeverria said. “We adapted, we iterated and we overcame.”

Later that year, with improvements and better established operating protocols, the vessel was able to sail for 17 days, covering 600 nautical miles and integrating its operations with manned ships in the region, he said.

Already, the task group, he said, has sent unmanned vessels it’s tested to the U.S. Fourth Fleet — the waters around central and South America — to be used in operations.

At the beginning of the year, Fourth Fleet announced the launch of “Operation Southern Spear,” which will deploy “long-dwell robotic surface vessels, small robotic interceptor boats and vertical take-off and landing robotic air vessels” to the region for maritime domain awareness and counternarcotics ops.

Experimenting in the Red Sea and other waters in the 5th Fleet area of operations does have its challenges. Echeverria cited the extreme heat as another stressor for test vessels. And in January, he acknowledged that, following the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attacks on Israel, the Navy had seen increased efforts by hostile actors to steal unmanned vessels launched by the service.

“We have been able to retain all of them,” he said.

In a March interview, Echeverria declined to say whether efforts to capture USVs in the Red Sea still continued.

An upcoming experiment in planning by Task Group 59.1 may soon make it easier and more practical for Navy commanders to employ unmanned vessels in concert with manned assets. The experiment, which involves flying drones, will employ them using JP-5, the Navy’s standard kerosene-based jet fuel, instead of other fuel variants including JP-4 and JP-8. This change eliminates the need for a waiver and reduces drag, Echeverria said.

“You can quickly deploy the asset where, in the past … you had to take precautionary measures on how you refuel the vessel or the system, so it just makes the process a little bit quicker,” he said.

Later this year, the task group will receive an advisor from the Navy’s newest rating: Robotics Warfare Specialist, a job created last year in concert with the Navy’s work to fast-track unmanned and robotic technology into the fleet.

Echeverria said the specialist will help the unit understand how to best employ the technology in its purview and match it to requirements coming from the Navy.

“I have a very skilled group of enlisted sailors that are eager to learn every single day and are eager to get these systems out there, because they understand that this is the future,” he said. “I’m really excited for what my team has been able to accomplish in such a small time frame … to the point where we’re seeing similar assets being utilized in other waterways, just based off of what we’ve learned out here.”

Taipei is aware of the threat posed by Beijing’s forces forces, but officials acknowledge more must be done to deter and, if need be, fight an invasion. That message was prominently included in the Chinese-language Quadrennial Defense Review, published last month, now available as an English translation.

“Training courses and intensity will be increased to enrich combat skills of troops at all levels, and enhance their immediate combat-readiness capabilities,” the document states.

A Defense News reporter has witnessed Taiwanese training events on multiple occasions, which often resembled formulaic and choreographed drills divorced from the fog of war in modern warfare.

A lack of realism has also been fingered as a problem by U.S. observers and advisors.

Rupert J. Hammond-Chambers, president of the U.S.-Taiwan Business Council, told Defense News that the QDR’s aspiration for better training amounts to an important self-criticism.

“Training is a huge area of needed progress,” he noted. “This is going hand in hand with U.S. willingness to liberalize past political boundaries and support expanded training on Taiwan and in the States.”

Randall Schriver, chairman of the U.S.-based Project 2049 Institute, testified to the U.S. Senate in late March that Washington must do more in training Taiwan’s forces.

“That was taboo for decades, and now we’re getting them to a point where they’re more professional, more proficient, as they’re placing a greater emphasis on training,” he told senators.

The QDR listed ways of improving the situation, such as “realistic combat training which is carried out in a force-on-force, on-site and real-time manner.” The review said this is necessary “in response to the enemy’s diversified threats and rapid changes in battlefields.”

One example of China’s evolving tactics was the introduction of new landing barges, exposed in satellite imagery in January. These mobile bridges were employed in a People’s Liberation Army (or PLA) exercise on a Guangdong beach in mid-March.

The innovative devices help military vehicles and supplies move rapidly from ship to shore.

Andrew Erickson, Professor of Strategy at the U.S. Naval War College, warned: “Make no mistake: China’s new bridge-barges are purpose-built for a Taiwan invasion scenario.”

By aligning three landing bridges in a row, a 900-yard-long causeway is created, allowing civilian or naval vessels to berth and unload equipment straight onto beaches.

Erickson explained this unique platform “may represent the missing piece in the puzzle for China to be able to attempt to deploy ferry-delivered, follow-on forces in support of an amphibious assault to the most advantageous locations along Taiwan’s coastline”.

Due to terrain and environmental conditions, the Project 2049 Institute previously identified just 14 Taiwanese beaches suitable for large-scale amphibious landings. However, these new bridge-barges expand the number of potential landing sites, complicating the equation for Taiwanese defense planners.

Taiwan’s defense review urged the armed forces to “construct realistic battlefield environments for joint training and exercises, force-on-force drills, and live-fire shooting practices to validate their results under near realistic combat conditions”.

Last year, Taiwan raised its conscription period from four to twelve months, citing “enemy threats.” Low morale and personnel retention remain problematic, however, something to which poor training contributes.

Conscripts were once lucky to receive a full magazine of bullets to fire during their national service, but the QDR promises they will now also learn how to operate complex weapons such as man-portable air defense missiles, drones and antitank rockets.

Despite such weaknesses, Hammond-Chambers said the latest QDR “grapples with the totality of the threat.”

He believes Taiwan is taking the PLA threat seriously enough. For example, “Defense spending has doubled in the past eight years, and the level of support from the U.S. too has improved in many areas, if not all.”

In terms of Taiwan preparedness, he noted there are “real bright spots, such as deterring a kinetic invasion. But in areas such as gray zone, blockade and critical infrastructure, there is much work to be done.”

Taiwan’s military has an immediate opportunity to demonstrate training improvements, after this year’s major Han Kuang exercise commenced on April 5. This fortnight-long tabletop drill contrasts with last year’s eight-day program.

Maj. Gen. Tung Chi-hsing, director of the Ministry of National Defense’s joint operations planning division, said the wargames have created scenarios in which frequent PLA military exercises escalate into a real attack on Taiwan.

The live-fire segment of Han Kuang will take place July 8-18, and this will see 20,000 reservists mobilized, up from 14,000 last year.

“Something is not working,” Trappier said in a hearing of the National Assembly defense committee here on Wednesday. “So it needs to be reviewed. It’s not up to me to do that, it’s up to the states to get together to figure out how to better manage this ambitious program.”

France, Germany and Spain in December 2022 awarded Dassault Aviation, Airbus, Indra Sistemas and Eumet a €3.2 billion ($3.6 billion) contract for phase 1B of the Future Combat Air System (FCAS), covering research, technology and overall design. That’s after Dassault and Airbus reached agreement on the next-generation fighter earlier that month, after more than a year of squabbling.

Dassault is the prime contractor for the new generation fighter or NGF at the heart of the combat system, with Airbus the main partner on behalf of Germany and Spain. After the development phase, the next step will be building a demonstrator in phase 2, which France has previously said would be announced in 2026, for a first flight scheduled in 2029.

Wrangling between the partners over how to share the workload is causing delays, and reaching agreement on Phase 2 “is still going to take time, that’s for sure,” according to Trappier.

The French executive is typically outspoken, and has previously criticized how work on FCAS is organized. He has previously commented on working with Airbus, saying in a parliamentary hearing in May 2023 that FCAS was difficult with three partners, though the executive said at the time he was “very confident in our capability to jointly develop a demonstrator.”

In a response to his new testimony this week, Airbus said the FCAS program has made “strong progress,” including the concept selection review achievement within the phase 1B contract. “We are now on our way to phase 2 contracts,” the company said in an emailed statement to Defense News.

“We are committed to FCAS, which represents the backbone of the European defense industry and strategic autonomy,” Airbus said. “We do believe in FCAS as a collaborative European industrial program, even more so in the current geopolitical context. That is our commitment from the beginning, to pursue a system of systems that goes beyond a future European fighter.”

Meanwhile, Germany’s new government said this week it plans to swiftly continue development of FCAS, according to the coalition agreement between the conservative CDU/CSU and the center-left SPD.

Trappier said the fragmented work methodology of FCAS is a cause of delays, as “each time we reopen pointless, endless discussions” with a push for more co-development and cooperation. Trappier said he disagrees with that model, and focus should be on prioritizing the best skills.

While Dassault is the prime contractor, the French company weighs for only a third in decision making, with Airbus having two-thirds of the vote on behalf of Germany and Spain, Trappier said. That means the lead company on the NGF can’t divvy up the work as it sees fit, the CEO complained.

“We have to constantly accommodate, constantly negotiate. It’s what’s called permanent negotiation. I hope we will reach an agreement to move forward,” he said.

Calculations on the shape of the future aircraft have been completed, “we know how to manufacture it, get it flying as quickly as possible,” the CEO said. “I would be very much in favor of speeding things up.”

Trappier mentioned the French-led nEUROn drone project as an example of what cooperation should look like, with six countries successfully developing an “ultra stealthy” combat drone on a tight budget. The CEO said Dassault as manager of the program didn’t compromise on the product for the sake of “geo return,” the practice of guaranteeing nations a work share proportional to their investment, which Trappier called “absolutely deadly for setting up a European cooperation.”

While cooperation was successful on nEUROn, “we don’t have that today on the NGF and I’m very sorry about that,” the executive said. He said Dassault finds itself alone against two partners, having to “persuade even more in order to reach decisions. It just takes a little more time.”

Trappier said some FCAS partners such as Thales are leaders in the field of defense electronics due to France’s history of seeking strategic autonomy, “so when you implement the geo return at every phase, it’s difficult.”

Meanwhile, when Dassault Aviation wants to work with German partners, certain technology derived from the Eurofighter is off-limits unless something “high-level” is provided in return, according to Trappier.

“Well, that doesn’t work. So we’re constantly bumping into these difficulties of work share,” he told lawmakers.

Dassault Aviation makes France’s Rafale fighter, while Airbus builds the Eurofighter in use in Germany and Spain. Both aircraft have roots in a multinational collaboration in the early 1980s on a future European fighter, with France opting to go it alone on the Rafale after disagreements over design authority and operational requirements.

France wants a next-generation aircraft capable of fulfilling the nuclear-deterrence role, able to perform its missions “without any constraints from any foreign country whatsoever,” and anything else would be a reason to stop the FCAS program, according to Trappier. The French fighter also needs to be able to operate from an aircraft carrier.

Trappier said that if France chooses a path of mutual dependency with allies, “there’s no going back,” an argument that may resonate with French lawmakers attached to the country’s policy of strategic autonomy in defense matters.

“We have to weigh what we are giving up to our allies, which may be normal in European cooperation and in a desire for European integration,” Trappier said. “But that also means we will depend on each other.”

Trappier was asked whether Dassault could go it alone should the FCAS program fail, and be able to provide France with a stealth-capable aircraft within a reasonable time frame.

“I don’t want to sound arrogant at all, but whose capabilities do I need other than my own to make a combat aircraft?” Trappier said. “So I’m willing to cooperate and share. I’m not against it, but I’m the one with the skills.”

Trappier said the future fighter doesn’t compete with the Rafale, which will operate alongside the new air combat system at some point. FCAS will be for beyond the 2040s, “more like 2045,” the CEO said.

Dassault is working on the future F5 standard for Rafale for 2030-2035, with a focus on connectivity and networking, and plans for a stealthy combat drone based on nEUROn as a loyal wingman.

“What we are trying to look at next is how we could make a future combat aircraft. Who with, that’s the question.”

The French state is committed to cooperation on FCAS to free up more resources and to contribute to “a slightly more united Europe,” Trappier said. “The problem is that when it comes down to the nitty gritty of the contracts, it’s more complicated.”

“We will do the NGF, as for with who, that’s not for me to answer,” Trappier said. “That’s up to the state, up to the politicians to say whether we should work with our traditional allies or not.”

He told lawmakers that if the future combat aircraft is produced as it is conceived today, with three partners, “Rafale will seem cheap to you.”

France in January 2024 announced the purchase of 42 Rafale jets for more than €5 billion, or a cost of at least €119 million per aircraft.

French President Emmanuel Macron said in March he intends to order more Rafale fighters, with plans for two squadrons at the air base of Luxeuil-Saint-Saveur, which currently doesn’t host the aircraft.

Trappier said Dassault would welcome additional French orders, though the company hasn’t received any yet.

Britain said that in a joint effort with Norway just over $580 million would be spent to provide hundreds of thousands of military drones, radar systems and anti-tank mines, as well as repair and maintenance contracts to keep Ukrainian armored vehicles on the battlefield.

On the eve of the meeting in Brussels, Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov said a key issue was strengthening his country’s air defenses. “Ukraine needs a sufficient number of modern systems like Patriot” missile systems, he said in a post on social media.

“A political decision is needed to supply these systems to protect our cities, towns, and the lives of our people — especially from the threat of Russian ballistic weapons. Our partners have such available systems,” Umerov said.

Russian forces hold the advantage in Ukraine, with the war now in its fourth year. Ukrainian officials and military analysts believe Russia is preparing to launch a fresh military offensive in coming weeks to ramp up pressure and strengthen the Kremlin’s hand in ceasefire talks.

Friday’s meeting is the 27th gathering of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group. It’s being chaired by Britain and Germany.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth will be absent from a forum that the United States created and led for several years, although he was due to take part via video.

Hegseth spent the first part of this week in Panama and returned to Washington on Wednesday night.

The April 7 memo aligns with the March 28 Secretary of Defense memo that called for an analysis of the department in hopes of reducing duplicative jobs, automating others and weeding out bureaucracy.

“To successfully deter America’s adversaries and posture our Forces to prevail in combat, we must focus our efforts and our resources on our top priorities,” the April 7 memo states. “Optimizing the organizational structure and civilian workforce of the Department is foundational to that effort.”

Secretaries of the military departments, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, directors of the defense agencies and field activities and Hegseth’s principal staff assistants were instructed to provide a “future-state” organizational chart to the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Jules W. Hurst III, pinpointing areas for consolidation.

The under secretary has until Friday to submit those proposals to Hegseth’s office.

The April 7 memo offers a simple litmus test for judging a position’s necessity.

“If this position didn’t exist today, and we were at war tomorrow, would we create it?” the memo states. “If the answer is no, it should be consolidated, restructured, or eliminated.”

Child care, teaching positions safe from DOD civilian hiring freeze

The letter lists several points of emphasis, including what’s listed as “mission-first alignment” — where every civilian role that doesn’t “directly enable lethality” should be “reclassified, outsourced, or removed” — and “flattened hierarchies,” where supervision is reduced in favor of providing more decision making power to positions at every level.

The memo also calls for the reduction of jobs with duplicate responsibilities, the elimination of reviews for a speedier “process,” reallocation of money that isn’t directly tied to “warfighter outcomes,” termination of civilian roles not tethered to operational priorities and leveraging of automation and artificial intelligence.

“By cutting unnecessary layers, eliminating redundancy, and aligning every role to mission readiness, we ensure our ability to respond to any threat with speed, precision, and overwhelming force,” the memo states.

Since President Trump took office, the Defense Department civilian workforce has seen several changes that broke with the status quo.

In February, DOD civilian employees were ordered by the department to reply to an email from Elon Musk — tasked with leading the Department of Government Efficiency — that asked for a five-point summation of their weekly accomplishments.

Civilian employees were also barred from using their government-issued travel charge cards, after being given a $1 spending limit.

“The troops that we have in the Republic of Korea are responsible wholly for preserving peace on the peninsula and in the region,” Army Gen. Xavier Brunson, who also serves as head of Combined Forces Command, told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday.

“They are a critical component to ballistic missile defense in the region. They are critical to helping Indo-Pacific Command see, sense and understand threats to the north and to deter a great many adversaries.”

Currently, roughly 28,500 U.S. military personnel are stationed in South Korea, working with both regional military partners and United Nations countries. The Defense Department has had at least 25,000 American troops deployed continuously there since the early 1950s.

Top general recommends US maintain current troop levels in Europe

But Trump and his advisers have questioned the value of the long-term presence of American military forces at a number of overseas locations. During an Oval Office ceremony on Wednesday, Trump was asked about reducing the number of American troops stationed in Europe, and injected Korea into his answer.

“We pay for U.S. military in Europe, and we don’t get reimbursed by much. South Korea, too,” he said. “It will be one of the things that we discuss that is unrelated to trade, but we’ll make it part of the trade conversation. It would be nice to wrap it all up together.”

At the start of Thursday’s hearing, Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Jack Reed, D-R.I., noted “there are rumors that the Defense department will direct a reduction of U.S. presence in South Korea, or retask these forces to focus on the threat from China” instead of North Korea.

Brunson did not address any of the force level change discussions directly, but said that from a military strategy standpoint, “we need to remember there is diplomacy and defense on the Korean Peninsula currently.”

He urged “strategic clarity” with any changes in force posture in the region, to ensure allies and adversaries understand America’s commitment to stability in the region.

Adm. Samuel Paparo, head of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, told lawmakers at the hearing that the forces stationed in Korea benefit not only that country but also numerous other allies in the region.

“They make significant contributions outside the Korean peninsula, including in their participation in multilateral exercises,” he said.

Defense Department officials have not announced any formal plans to begin force reductions or significant posture changes in the region. Trump did not provide any additional details on when a review of troop levels in Europe or the Pacific may begin.

The ships represent Turkey’s first corvette export to the Asia-Pacific region and will support Malaysia’s ability to carry out a variety of maritime defense missions including anti-surface, anti-air, asymmetric and electronic warfare.

Based on the ADA-class design, the three corvettes are scheduled for delivery by the end of 2027.

STM, the main contractor, is responsible for the design, construction, integration, and delivery of the vessels, as well as logistics support. The ships are being tailored to meet Royal Malaysian Navy requirements and will be constructed in Turkey with the involvement of local defense firms.

The LMS Batch-2 ships will feature a stealthy hull with a low radar cross-section and high maneuverability. With a displacement of approximately 2,500 tons, each vessel will measure 99.5 meters in length and reach speeds over 26 knots. Powered by a CODAD propulsion system with four diesel engines, the ships will have a range exceeding 4,000 nautical miles at cruising speed and an endurance of 14 days. They will accommodate a crew of 111 and support helicopter operations with a hangar and refueling capabilities.

The corvettes will be equipped with an Italian Leonardo 76mm main gun, one Aselsan Smash 30mm secondary gun, Roketsan Atmaca surface-to-surface and South Korean Haegung surface-to-air missiles, decoy launchers, and electronic warfare systems. Their combat systems include a 3D surveillance radar, IFF, electro-optical fire control radar, target designation sights, and a combat management system provided by Havelsan.

The LMS Batch-2 project follows the June 2024 signing of a government-to-government defense agreement between Turkey and Malaysia, with steel cutting for the ships taking place last December.

Those systems, paired with an increased emphasis on air defense training for all Marines, are part of how the Corps is getting after the drone threat.

The announcement came Tuesday at the Navy League’s annual Sea, Air and Space Exposition during a panel on Marine Corps modernization.

“It has been a long time, maybe since World War II, since a member of an infantry squad on the ground actually had to look up or over his shoulder do anything other than clear an aircraft hot, or call in a medevac or something like that,” said Lt. Gen. Benjamin Watson, head of Training and Education Command.

Drone killing Marines: Corps seeks ‘buckshot-like’ counter-drone gear

The Marine Corps provided few details about the prototypes, citing security concerns.

“As a matter of operational security, the exact technologies will not be discussed, but the interim solution fielded will allow Marines to detect, track, identify, and kinetically and non-kinetically defeat adversary [small unmanned aircraft systems] in a dismounted formation,” according to a release.

Watson noted that in the Cold War era, Marines commonly trained in defending small units from air attack. That was less necessary during the era of complete air superiority that troops experienced in recent wars.

A return to cover, concealment and camouflage focus is also part of the initiative, Watson said.

“We may never fight again with the air superiority in the way we have traditionally come to appreciate it,” Watson said.

The protection isn’t just for the infantry, either.

“One of the things that is apparent to all of us is that unmanned aerial systems are a threat not just to infantry Marines, but to all Marines,” said Lt. Gen. Eric Austin, head of Combat Development Command.

Those deploying units are likely going to be the Marine Expeditionary Units and Marine Littoral Regiments, a Marine official told Marine Corps Times.

The handheld dismounted prototypes are for defeating small drone threats, which thwart small, dismounted units. The Corps also has a larger ground-based air defense program known as GBAD, which works against larger threats, such as missiles and mortars.

“Current Ground Based Air Defense (GBAD) capabilities that are being fielded today predominantly focus on mounted platforms organic to the Low Altitude Air Defense Battalions (LAAD Bn) and the Littoral Anti-Air Battalions (LAAB), which encompass the entire air defense continuum up to and including defeating manned aircraft and cruise missile threats,” according to a Marine release. “Those dedicated air defense assets are not always practical or available at scale to support individual unit operations.”

The selection came after a year-long review process and a fly-off, which pitted various systems against each other in September, officials said.

In March, the Corps awarded a $642 million, 10-year contract to Anduril to provide installation-based, counter-drone equipment to protect Marine bases and fixed sites.

The same company received a $200 million contract to develop the Marine Air Defense Integrated System in November. The MADIS and L-MADIS, a light version, are key to protecting disparate, disaggregated units from a range of airborne threats.

Developed for the Missile Defense Agency’s Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor program, HBTSS, the L3Harris satellite has been on orbit since February 2024. According to MDA, the spacecraft is providing important test data and imagery of hypersonic test events.

Speaking with reporters April 9 at the Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Ed Zoiss, president of space and airborne systems at L3Harris, said the company is ready to start producing the HBTSS sensor in high volumes.

“The sensor has proven itself out, and we need to start full-rate production,” he said. “We’re ready to do it now.”

In an executive order signed just one week into his second term, President Donald Trump directed the Pentagon to start making plans for a Golden Dome missile defense capability made up of advanced sensors and interceptors designed to track and neutralize both traditional and high-end missile threats.

In response, the Space Force, Missile Defense Agency, National Reconnaissance Office and other Defense Department agencies have been crafting options for achieving that vision. They’ve also reached out to the defense industry for ideas.

Zoiss said L3Harris proposed increased HBTSS production as part of its response to DOD’s call for input.

“We put in an architecture that we recommend for HBTSS and how we would see it to have global coverage,” he said. “We’re waiting to see what comes back.”

Space Development Agency launches study on Trump’s Iron Dome order

An increase in HBTSS production would be a shift in how DOD officials have envisioned the sensor’s role in space-based missile defense — at least publicly. MDA launched the capability in partnership with the Space Development Agency, which is building out a constellation of satellites in low Earth orbit that can detect and track hypersonic and ballistic missile threats.

That constellation will include tracking satellites equipped with wide-field-view sensors — built by L3Harris, Northrop Grumman and Sierra Space — and a smaller number of medium-field-of-view sensors like HBTSS, designed to track dimmer targets and send data to interceptors.

SDA is buying the tracking satellites in batches, or tranches, and has awarded contracts for Tranche 0, 1 and 2. Zoiss said the medium-field-of-view sensors SDA is buying for Tranche 1 and 2 are essentially copies of the HBTSS capability.

In a speech Wednesday at the symposium, MDA Deputy Director Maj. Gen. Jason Cothern said the agency looks forward to the capability being “operationalized” by the Space Force and integrated into SDA’s architecture.

Cothern said HBTSS has, to date, demonstrated “remarkable capability essential for missile defense.” MDA has used the satellite to track two separate hypersonic test flights and the sensor has collected more than 650,000 images of tailored test events and “interesting real-world events,” he added.

Missile Defense Agency satellites track first hypersonic launch

As DOD considers how HBTSS might fit into its Golden Dome strategy, MDA has begun work on a follow-on capability, a Discriminating Space Sensor, or DSS.

Whereas HBTSS was designed to track dimmer targets than traditional missile-warning sensors, DSS will help the Defense Department distinguish missile targets from enemy countermeasures, which are meant to make their advanced weapons harder to identify.

MDA plans to launch a prototype by the end of the decade, though Cothern said budget deliberations — which will be informed by the department’s Golden Dome approach — could shorten that timeline.

“The whole intent is to, like HBTSS, do an on-orbit demonstration of these discriminating capabilities to inform the future space-based architectures and what we need for next-generation missile defense,” he said.

MDA Director Heath Collins said last year DSS had completed ground concept testing and was ready to move into the on-orbit demonstration phase. The agency requested funds for DSS in its fiscal 2025 budget, but the documents don’t specify how much it asked for.

Like HBTSS, the agency will lead prototype development and then work with the Space Force to transition DSS for operational use.

“We certainly respect the sovereignty of the Panamanians,” Hegseth said before departing the country back to Washington.

Earlier Wednesday, Hegseth faced questions in a press conference about the two countries’ joint statement following their meetings Tuesday. Panama’s version included a line about its sovereignty over the canal; America’s didn’t, though it discussed working through Panama’s constitution, which affirms authority over the canal itself.

The impasse brought back concern that the U.S. was reneging on its agreement ceding the canal to Panamanian control, finalized in 1999 after a 20-year handover.

Trump has disparaged that deal and said multiple times that America would take the canal back — even saying in a March address to Congress that the U.S. was already “reclaiming” the waterway.

Panama’s President Raul Mulino publicly denied the claims and referred to them as an insult on the country’s dignity.

Hegseth vows US will ‘take back’ Panama canal from Chinese influence

Hegseth’s visit this week worked to calm any such tension. In carefully planned remarks, he referenced Panama’s value as a partner and its long history with the U.S., including on building the canal in the early 1900s. He also signed agreements to increase America’s military work with the country through further training and rotating in more U.S. forces and equipment.

“He acknowledged the sovereignty of Panama over the Panama Canal,” Frank Abrego, Panama’s minister of public security, said of Hegseth at the press conference.

Speaking to traveling press on the flight back to Washington, senior defense officials didn’t specify how many further American troops would enter the country, nor give a timeline for their arrival. They also didn’t elaborate on plans Hegseth previewed to renew Fort Sherman, the U.S. military’s now-abandoned jungle fighting school in the country.

Any further dispatch of U.S. troops to Panama would first require consensus with Panama’s government, said one of the defense officials, allowed to speak anonymously to describe the agreement.

In return, Panama’s government expressed interest in American help protecting the canal from cyberattacks and surveilling it.

The U.S. once had a large military presence inside Panama, though it was drawn down heavily during the canal handover. The number of American troops in the country now rises and falls from a few dozen to a couple hundred, depending on exercises and training programs.

In late 1989, America’s military launched a two-month operation to depose Panama’s then-President Manuel Noriega. The invasion has left scars for many in the country today, wary of U.S. coercion and, perhaps, another attack.

“There’s extraordinary sensitivities at hand,” the first defense official said, noting that any suggestion — by China or America — of infringing on Panama’s sovereignty over the canal is a “non-starter” in the country.

At the same time, the officials said, the Trump administration is increasingly concerned about the drift of Panama, and Latin America as a whole, toward what it calls “China’s malign influence.”

China’s government has vastly expanded its trade and investment relationship with the region, including through the Belt and Road Initiative, a global infrastructure program American officials say includes predatory lending practices.

On the trip, Hegseth added a clause to Trump’s pledge to take the canal back, soothing concerns that the U.S. military was developing plans to seize the waterway, reported by multiple outlets in March.

“Together, we are going to take back the canal from China’s influence,” Hegseth said.

Mulino pulled Panama from the Belt and Road Initiative this February, the same month U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio made an earlier visit to the country. Hegseth mentioned his respect for Mulino’s leadership multiple times on the trip, and the secretary’s team described the president as a long-term partner.

The Trump administration has said the U.S. will focus more intently on Latin America, including through the American military, which surged troops and warships for immigration missions since January.

In turn, Hegseth repeatedly called the Panama Canal “key terrain” and affirmed America’s commitment to maintain its access to it — repeated in the two countries’ joint statement.

Around 40% of U.S. container traffic passes through the Panama Canal each year alongside about 100 American Navy vessels, a number that would surely increase if a war began in the Pacific.

The French Directorate General for Armament is looking to identify the technical solutions that will enable a demonstration firing in a year’s time, the defense-procurement agency told Defense News in a written reply to questions.

The DGA is working with a consortium of Safran and MBDA and another of Thales and ArianeGroup to develop a tactical strike capability in the 150 kilometer (93 mile) range.

Time is running out for France to replace its Lance-Roquettes Unitaire, a modified version of the M270 multiple launch rocket system, with the Army’s nine remaining systems set to reach the end of their service life in 2027.

Lawmakers and military brass have been pushing to develop a domestic option rather than buy abroad, in line with French policy for autonomy in defense matters.

“Service withdrawal of the LRU is approaching, and retention of the capability will be an issue at that point,”said Léo Péria-Peigné, a researcher at the Paris-based Institut Français des Relations Internationales specializing in armament capacity.

“The urgency is relative – we have hardly ever used this capacity in the past 30 years.”

Safran and MBDA are on track for the “ambitious” DGA schedule, confirming their target for a test firing in mid-2026, they said in a joint statement to Defense News. Thales and ArianeGroup didn’t comment on timing, with Thales saying the companies have been working as an integrated team for several months to offer a “pertinent solution” for the armed forces.

France’s 2024-2030 defense spending plan has budgeted €600 million ($663 million) for the rocket-artillery program, called Frappe Longue Portée Terrestre or FLP-T for short, with a goal of buying at least 13 systems by 2030 and 26 systems to equip a battalion by 2035.

The schedule to replace the LRU “is proceeding nominally” and within the timetable set by the defense spending law, according to the DGA.

Meanwhile, there’s still the option of a foreign purchase if things end up taking to long. That decision is on the calendar for next year, the directorate said.

German rocket artillery pick tests the waters on US arms dependence

The long-range tactical strike capability is “essential” and a niche that needs to be filled, French Army Chief of Staff Gen. Pierre Schill told lawmakers in an October hearing, noting that many other European countries have a rocket artillery capability.

Europe lacks a home-made HIMARS equivalent, and European armies shopping for rocket artillery in recent years either picked the U.S. option, the PULS launcher by Israel’s Elbit Systems, or Hanwha Aerospace’s Chunmoo.

Elbit is working with KNDS on a Europeanized version of PULS, while Germany’s Rheinmetall and Lockheed Martin in 2023 joined forces to develop the GMARS system.

Other than France, European countries still in the market for rocket artillery include Sweden and Norway. The Netherlands, Germany, Denmark and Spain already picked PULS, Poland acquired Chunmoo and HIMARS, while the Baltic countries, Romania and Italy are HIMARS customers. Meanwhile, the U.K. is considering expanding its fleet of M270 multiple launch rocket systems.

That leaves a narrow commercial window for French-developed rocket artillery, though a push by the European Union’s executive arm for member states to spend more of their defense budgets within the 27-nation bloc may provide a tailwind for a European solution.

Safran and MBDA said their rocket-artillery system, dubbed Thundart, is based on “mature and mastered subsystems,” and an initial operational capability could be produced before 2030.

In the already saturated marketplace, “there will be no export market for a French system that will not be ready before 2030,” said Péria-Peigné.

The DGA signed innovation partnerships with the two consortiums in November, providing a first round of financing for the FLP-T program. The partnership contract allows the procurement office to buy the system at the end of the development phase without a new competitive tender, provided the armament meets performance requirements.

The innovation partnership includes a “significant degree of self-financing” by industry, Safran Electronics & Defense CEO Franck Saudo said in a parliamentary hearing in November.

Each consortium will carry out a firing of its demonstrator, after which the French government will make a choice, the DGA said. At the end of the current 18-month contracts, the consortiums will submit a proposal that will allow the government to choose between various solutions, including off-the-shelf equipment, according to the directorate.

DGA head Emmanuel Chiva had told the Sénat foreign affairs committee in November that if the industrial partners would “work well,” the first orders might be placed in late 2025 or early 2026. That now appears to have been pushed back by several months.

Safran and MBDA said the geopolitical context and changing artillery requirements reinforce the interest of a sovereign solution for France in particular, but also for other European countries, with Thundart the only rocket artillery system designed and built in Europe, free of U.S. arms-trade restrictions, and with independent manufacturing that provides control over the production pace.

The companies started working together on designing the new system at the end of 2023, and presented a mock-up of their Thundart 227 mm long-range guided-artillery rocket at the Eurosatory defense show in June 2024, as a first step in the FLP-T program. The rocket has 150-kilometer accuracy, according to Matthieu Krouri, MBDA’s head of land combat systems.

MBDA has production capacity adapted to the size of the tactical munitions required in France’s Centre-Val de Loire region, where final assembly will take place, the companies said. For its part, Safran has “strongly” increased production of AASM Hammer guided bombs, which have a guidance kit “very similar” to that of the Thundart munition, according to the consortium.

“Safran and MBDA are convinced of the relevance of this solution and have already invested heavily in this project,” the companies said. “The collaboration between Safran and MBDA on Thundart is a long-term project, which is already well advanced.”

Meanwhile, Thales and ArianeGroup teams are “fully mobilized” to propose a sovereign fire-support system that can deal with high-value targets, either surface or point targets, Thales said, without providing further details.

The new system will replace nine M270s on a Bradley tracked chassis, one of the rare pieces of U.S.-origin combat equipment still serving with the French Army, whose force is built around French-developed and manufactured tanks, armored vehicles and tube artillery.

Replacing the decades-old LRU is a priority for the army, according to the 2025 defense budget, with a sovereign solution preferred as long as it can be achieved rapidly and with controlled costs.

Army engineers may be able extend the lifespan of the LRU by another two to three years, but not much longer, according to Péria-Peigné at IFRI.

The goal of a sovereign solution had “not been abandoned,” French Armed Forces Chief of Staff Gen. Thierry Burkhard told a National Assembly hearing in October.

Chiva said in November the LRU replacement “must be sovereign, and we are working towards this,” with the project taking some time due to the need to define Army requirements and “a certain confusion” in the requests.

The urgency of the capacity requirement may dictate having to turn to a foreign system after all, National Assembly special budget rapporteur Christophe Plassard said in October.

At the same time, HIMARS may not be a solution, as stress on production lines means delivery of the U.S system might not be possibly starting in 2027, the National Assembly’s defense committee wrote in an evaluation of the 2025 defense budget published in October.

“There is internal tension between supporters of the off-the-shelf solution and those in favor of national development,” Péria-Peigné said.

The military planning law calls for a system that could have a longer range than the LRU, in particular by allowing integration of hypersonic missiles with a range of several hundreds of kilometers. The DGA has asked both consortiums to study the cost and feasibility of including a future operational capability for strikes at ranges of 500 kilometers and 1,000 kilometers.

The rocket-artillery project is separate from the European Long-range Strike Approach, which concerns strikes at a distance of several thousands of kilometers, Burkhard said in November. Still, the envisaged future development of the FLP-T project has “strong adherence” with ELSA, according to the DGA.

Development of a long-range land-based strike capability beyond 1,000 kilometers is less urgent, with systems not expected until the 2030-2035 time frame, according a supplement to the 2025 defense budget discussing preparation for the future. Studies on strategic long-range strike were ongoing based on solutions proposed by ArianeGroup and MBDA, according to the October report.

MBDA has proposed its Land Cruise Missile, a land-based version of its company’s Missile de Croisière Naval, as a short-term solution for ELSA.

As outgoing secretary of the Air Force in the Biden administration, I had the opportunity to make that decision but I chose to defer it until after the presidential election. Why? At first glance, the decision to ensure the U.S. Air Force has the most capable manned fighter in the world doesn’t seem to be a tough call.

But Congress needs to look beyond the obvious appeal of this advanced aircraft and ask the Trump administration some hard questions: Is this the right airplane for our defense strategy? Is it affordable? Does it displace higher priorities? I deferred the NGAD decision because I didn’t have those answers before I left the Department of the Air Force — and it’s unclear whether the Trump administration has them now.

I started the NGAD program in 2015, when I was under secretary of defense for acquisition, technology and Logistics. At the time, I launched the Aerospace Innovation Initiative, or AII, to build experimental prototypes, known as X-planes, that would develop and test high-risk and high-payoff technologies for the next generation of fighters after the F-35, while also supporting competition and maintaining cutting-edge aircraft design teams in the defense industrial base. This program successfully produced the technologies that are the basis for the designs that competed to become the F-47.

Following AII’s success, the Air Force moved on to developing more detailed tactical designs with all the features and subsystems required to support the Air Force’s chosen mission. When I returned to the Pentagon as Secretary of the Air Force in 2021, I found that the Air Force had decided to pursue a follow-on to the F-22, a fighter designed for manned Penetrating Counter Air, or PCA, missions. Such missions involve flying deep into enemy airspace and fighting against robust, state-of-the-art defenses. The PCA emphasis brought with it significant costs — tens of billions for development and hundreds of millions per aircraft for production. These expenses limit the potential aircraft inventory to small numbers. We currently have fewer than 200 F-22s. These airplanes are precious, and we can’t tolerate high losses in this fleet.

We don’t know what conflicts or warfighting scenarios will drive the Trump administration’s defense investments. PCA designs are based on the need to take the air superiority fight deep into heavily defended enemy territory, but we have to ask: Is this a sound planning scenario for nuclear powers like China or Russia? If the Trump administration’s strategy emphasizes homeland security and defensive scenarios, wouldn’t a lower cost design more focused on Defensive Counter-Air, or DCA, make more sense? Would a multirole next-generation design, like the F-35, make more sense? Would an aircraft designed to work with uncrewed tactical aircraft, like the Air Force uncrewed collaborative combat aircraft, make more sense? The decision to buy the F-47 needs to be the right choice for the future — this is the only new crewed fighter aircraft the Air Force will likely pursue for a long time.

Just before I left office, I authored a report for Congress on the Department of the Air Force that the U.S. would need in 2050. I discussed the strategic environment we could expect at that time and what the Air Force and Space Force would need to do to prepare. I predicted a transition to reliance on uncrewed aircraft that would most likely be controlled by crewed aircraft designed for that purpose, providing superior capabilities and putting fewer pilots at risk. The F-47 will be able to control uncrewed aircraft, but it isn’t optimized for that function. Congress needs to ensure that the Trump administration has considered the relationship between the F-47, the Trump defense strategy and the overall future of the Air Force.

Moreover, whether the F-47 will fit into the Trump administration’s 2026 budget and future years program remains an open question. When the Air Force created its first draft 2026 budget and five-year program in 2024, we concluded we couldn’t afford NGAD no matter how capable and relevant it was. Congress needs to ask what has changed since then.

Over the next five years, the F-47 program will require tens of billions of dollars in additional funding. At this point, with all the other demands on the Air Force budget, including recapitalizing two legs of the nuclear triad, it’s unclear whether this administration — or the next — will be able to continue this program. Congress should demand to see the affordability analysis the Trump administration should have completed before awarding the contract.

Congress should also consider whether the Trump administration’s future year defense plan and budget will prioritize higher priority investments than the F-47. When I left the Pentagon, the Department of the Air Force had a list of unfunded strategic priorities that were higher priority than NGAD. At the top of the list were counter-space weapons and airbase defense. Neither of these is a direct Air Force responsibility, but both are critical to the success of the entire Joint Force. China is well on its way to fielding robust space-based targeting systems that threaten all of our land- and sea-based forces. We must acquire counter-space systems at scale or China will be able to target all of our assets at sea and on the ground with impunity and in real time. China also has an ever-expanding arsenal of sophisticated weapons ready to strike our airbases in the Pacific. Those bases are limited in numbers, not well defended and each is subject to attack by literally hundreds of missiles of all types. Our new F-47s — and all of our forward-based aircraft — will never get off the ground if we don’t address these threats through substantial budget increases.

Congress must demand that the Trump administration provide a national defense strategy with the 2026 budget and explain how the F-47 supports that strategy. The administration also needs to show the F-47 is affordable and that it hasn’t come at the expense of higher priority needs. Congress must ensure that the Trump administration provides the needed support for the F-47 decision. Until then, the jury is still out on whether the F-47 contract should have been awarded.

Frank Kendall served as the Secretary of the Air Force during the Biden administration.

“The military-to-military relationships, especially with my counterparts that I deal with on a routine basis …it’s business as usual,” Chief of Space Operations Gen. Chance Saltzman told reporters during a briefing at the Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colorado. “We’re still discussing the same challenges we had. … We’re still working the same basic collaborative issues that we’ve been working.”

Saltzman’s comments come as U.S. aid for Kiev’s defense has slowed and the Defense Department is moving troops away from a Ukraine support hub in Poland. In early March, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency temporarily froze Ukraine’s access to key satellite imagery amid a broader DOD pause on military aid to the country.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has also urged Europe to invest more domestic funding in national security and rely less on U.S. support. At the same time, U.S. officials have said they want the European Union to continue to buy weapons from American companies.

Saltzman noted that much of the Space Force’s engagement with European partners comes through NATO and the service’s commitment to information sharing with allied nations. Broader decisions around support for Ukraine and U.S. troop levels in Europe are outside of the Space Force’s scope or responsibility.

In the same briefing, Air Marshal Paul Godfrey, the Space Force’s assistant chief of space operations for future concepts and partnerships, said the service and its partners recognize Space Force support to allied nations with nascent military space capabilities and organizations is crucial.

“If we just cut ties, let Europe get on with it, then they’re going to have to spend significant amounts of money, potentially go down dead-ends, developing the sort of capabilities that the U.S. has put together over decades,” he said.

That message undergirds a new international partnerships strategy the Space Force expects to roll out in the coming weeks. Saltzman previewed the document Wednesday during a speech at the symposium.

“Our international partnership strategy is built on one key concept: Coalition operations will be far more successful if we work together well before those contingency operations become necessary,” he said. “We’re not tightly coupled in our training, if we’re not reconciling our operational concepts, if we’re not integrating our capabilities, we will have a very steep learning curve when called upon in crisis or conflict.”

The strategy’s three main goals are to leverage individual nations’ unique expertise, improve information sharing and interoperability and integrate across the spectrum of operations — from force design to employment of capabilities.

Saltzman said the Space Force wants to embed more allies into its planning processes and acquisition strategies, expand joint exercises and coordinate personnel exchanges that allow partners to learn from one another.

He also emphasized that the strategy does not view partnership in space as a one-way street, but instead recognizes that all nations have something to contribute.

“The trick is in focusing on areas where we have a comparative advantage,” he said. “Maybe it’s space domain awareness or hosted payloads. Maybe it’s launch capacity or even simple geography for a ground station. I firmly believe that every contribution can make a meaningful impact on space security.”

Saltzman and Godfrey told reporters they’ve been floating the draft strategy to foreign partners this week at Space Symposium and will discuss it in greater depth Thursday as Saltzman hosts a gathering of international space chiefs representing around 20 different nations.

Then on Friday, the 10 nations who are members of the Space Force’s Combined Space Operations initiative will meet to discuss partnership opportunities for the coming year.

The unusual move — which gives Driscoll the top post in two separate, complex federal agencies — came after President Donald Trump opted to remove FBI Director Kash Patel from the acting director role in recent days.

White House officials did not release information on why Patel was relieved or why Driscoll was selected for the extra post. Defense Department officials declined to comment on whether the new role will take away from Driscoll’s focus on leading the Army.

Driscoll, 38, was confirmed to the top Army job by the Senate just 43 days ago. He is a former senior adviser to Vice President JD Vance and spent four years in the Army, including a deployment to Iraq in 2009.

VA secretary tapped to temporarily lead 2 federal oversight offices

As the temporary head of ATF, Driscoll will lead efforts within the Department of Justice to investigate federal offenses related to firearms use and sales, as well as illegal sales of explosives, alcoholic beverages and tobacco products.

White House officials under Trump have suggested merging the ATF with another agency — potentially the Drug Enforcement Administration — to cut back on bureaucracy and federal staffing. No specific plans have been outlined yet.

Meanwhile, Defense Department leaders are conducting reviews of service civilian staffing and missions for possible budget cuts in the future.

Unlike his predecessors in the White House, Trump has used his executive powers to double task a number of senior officials in temporary leadership roles.

For example, Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins was sworn in by the Senate for that leadership role but is also serving as the interim head of the Office of Government Ethics and the Office of Special Counsel while the administration reorganizes both agencies.

Outside advocates have warned that the multiple jobs could distract appointees from their primary duties and create confusion about command responsibilities within the affected agencies.

The weapon, dubbed Bullseye, will be launchable from the sea, land and air, with the developers promising “significant attack performance against high-value targets at an affordable price point.”

“We’re getting lessons learned on cost reduction, and we’ll build at least half the missile in the United States,” Scott Forney, President of General Atomics Electromagnetic Systems, was quoted as saying by Naval News.

Development of the weapon was announced at the Sea-Air-Space 2025 conference in Maryland.

The Bullseye missile appears to be derived from Rafael’s Ice Breaker system, which has a 300-kilometer (186 miles) range. Unlike Ice Breaker, however, the new missile will be able to carry various warheads and propulsion systems, General Atomics said on the new product’s web page.

The weapon’s makers also highlighted the “very low observable” stealth characteristics, autonomous target recognition, and resilience in GPS-denied environments.

Autonomous target recognition has been an area of concern for defense researchers but no comprehensive international rules yet exist on the level of human involvement that a weapons system must have.

General Atomics bills the Bullseye as “fully autonomous with man-in-the-loop decision back-up capability” on the company’s spec sheet. The missile will also be equipped with “advanced mission planning” and “synchronized attack capability.”

The new missile has reportedly reached Technology Readiness Level 8, with Rafael having already completed aerodynamics, engine, seeker and launch integration testing. The missile is compatible with jet fighters, light attack aircraft, helicopters, small maritime vessels and ground vehicles, the arms manufacturer said. Initial deliveries are slated for late 2025, General Atomics said.

The partnership seeks to leverage Rafael’s combat-proven missile technology—including systems like Iron Dome and Spike missiles—with GA-EMS’s U.S.-based manufacturing expertise in Tupelo, Mississippi. It also highlights the continuing close ties between the two countries’ defense establishments at a time when other traditional U.S. partners have been estranged.

That’s the vision Deputy Commandant for Aviation Lt. Gen. Bradford Gering shared Tuesday at the Navy League’s annual Sea-Air-Space Exposition.

“So, what does modernization look like in the Marine Corps? It’s an all-fifth-gen tactical air force of F-35s augmented by collaborative combat aircraft,” Gering said. “It’s a full fleet of CH-53K helicopters for the heavy lift mission.”

Gering added that the MV-22 program will have finished its platform midlife upgrades over the remainder of the next five-year budget cycle.

AI, advanced tech central to new Marine Corps aviation plan

Also involved in the Corps’ aviation wing will be its drone fleet of MQ-9 Reapers, which are flying today. Those will eventually see major payload and sensor upgrades, Gering said.

On the larger side of the aviation equation, the Corps expects to complete purchasing of the 95 total KC-130J cargo planes it needs for its transport fleet.

Two training squadrons and nine operational squadrons are now flying the F-35 Lightning II jet, a fifth-generation fighter. Over the next five years the Corps will build another seven active duty squadrons, which will be supplemented by two Reserve squadrons.

At the end of the F-35 transition there will be 18 active squadrons, a dozen flying the F-35B and six flying the F-35C. The two Reserve squadrons will fly the C variant, which is built for aircraft carrier takeoff and landing. The B variant can conduct vertical takeoff and landing.

Gering said the Corps also wants to be able to maintain and close kill webs and all enemy air assets through an airborne command and control and an “aviation ground support structure that is scalable and can conduct expeditionary operations and work in a distributed aviation environment.”

In its aviation plan, released in January, the Corps provided more details on its airborne assets.

The Marines shifted their F-35 plans to buy more carrier-based F-35Cs and fewer short takeoff and vertical landing F-35Bs. The total number of Joint Strike Fighters the service plans to buy remains 420.

The Corps will eventually fly 280 F-35Bs and 140 F-35Cs, more than doubling the number of F-35Cs included in the 2022 plan, which called for 353 F-35Bs and 67 F-35Cs.

The agency now oversees five core tasks – up from three – including joint procurement facilitation and defense innovation coordination, the agency said in its annual report, released this week. The update follows a May 2024 landmark Long-Term Review endorsed by EU defense ministers, who pledged to increase collaborative spending amid concerns over industrial fragmentation and technological gaps.

EU defense expenditure was projected to have reached €326 billion, or $361 billion, in 2024 (1.9% of GDP), a 30% increase since 2021. Almost a third (31%) now flows to defense investments, primarily the procurement of new equipment.

Nonetheless, Europe still spends less than 0.05% of its GDP on defense research and technology – a fraction of U.S. and Chinese investments. “Buying together saves money, while developing assets together makes us more independent,” said Jiří Šedivý, the Agency’s chief executive, last December.

The agency’s expanded role includes managing around 200 projects worth €681 million, from the Low Earth Orbit satellite demonstrator to the multinational procurement of 155 mm artillery shells for Ukraine. Ten countries have ordered over €350 million worth of ammunition through EDA’s fast-track mechanism, with first deliveries reaching Kyiv in May 2024.

“The European defence base remains fragmented, characterised by a lack of joint procurement and national preferences for defence spending.  This results in small, localised markets with relatively low production numbers,” Šedivý told a February 2025 European Economic and Social Committee forum. One of the EDA’s key objectives is to neutralize this European disadvantage and instead play to the Union’s strengths.

The joint procurement of weapons is one example of this, and an entirely new dimension to the EU’s capabilities that would have been unthinkable until Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It was formalized as one of the EDA’s tasks in May 2024. Brussels’s joint purchase of shells was the first time that the bloc had jointly made an arms purchase.

Since 2022, the European Union has become more assertive in the defense space and has made decisive moves towards increasing Brussels’ role in military matters. Just last month, EU leaders greenlit a new defense spending scheme.

Closer collaboration with Switzerland, Norway, Ukraine, and the United States – albeit based on pre-Trump trends – was also in the cards, according to the EDA report.

Four landmark letters of intent were facilitated by the European Defence Agency last year. The flagship amongst them—literally—is an agreement to develop a common European combat vessel by 2040. The ECV is meant to “protect trade routes to ensure the uninterrupted flow of goods to and from EU territory,” the Agency said in its report.

The other three big new projects cover loitering munitions, electronic warfare and an integrated air and missile defense for the continent, with the Agency working to coordinate procurement and conduct research into disruptive technologies to give Europe a leg up on threats only just beginning to emerge.

Despite the increase in scope and subsequent back-patting in its annual self-assessment, some challenges do remain for the EDA. For one, the EU’s stated goal to make 35% of all defense procurements collaboratively is likely still ambitious, with the most recent numbers from 2021 putting it at 18%.

“The urge to swiftly address capability shortfalls through readily available military equipment has led to a surge of national off-the-shelf acquisitions, causing a temporary slowdown of collaborative procurement,” the EDA wrote in its end-of-2024 report last December.

As the Agency prepares to move into its brand new, purpose-built Brussels headquarters by 2027, its test will be converting ministerial declarations into deployable capabilities. With the European Defence Fund allocating €1 billion for 2025 R&D projects – including AI-enabled systems and dual-use technologies – the agency will see growing importance, but also increased pressure to deliver strategically relevant results.

“As Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine enters its fourth year, the need for a strong, resilient, and coordinated European defence is greater than ever,” Šedivý said in his recap of the past year. The EU must be able to defend itself, he added -- “alone, if necessary. This new era demands bold decisions and action.”

“Together, we are going to take back the canal from China’s influence,” Hegseth said.

The secretary spoke Tuesday from a Panamanian navy pier, renovated with $5 million funding from the U.S. Army. The backdrop — a towering bridge with cargo ships loitering in the distance — was itself a sign of Hegseth’s priorities.

The Trump administration has promised a new focus on the western hemisphere, enforced in large part through the military. In his first three months, Hegseth has sent around 7,500 more active-duty troops to the U.S. southwest border and deployed two Navy destroyers to patrol the country’s coasts in a show of force. He’s also used military aircraft to deport migrants from the U.S., including some to Panama.

Hegseth’s visit shows that approach extending farther beyond American borders, and a gentler tone from the Trump administration. On the trip, he promised to increase joint exercises with Panama, rotate more American troops into the country and to renovate a former U.S. military jungle school now in disrepair.

“We welcome the opportunity to have an increased troop presence here alongside the Panamanians to secure the sovereignty of the Panama Canal,” Hegseth said in a press conference Wednesday. He didn’t directly answer questions on whether that presence could again become permanent.

Canal security

Countries across Latin America have yearned for a more intent American presence in recent years, including as China expands its trade and infrastructure investments there. That said, not all attention is welcome attention, something especially clear in Panama.

President Donald Trump himself has repeatedly said the U.S. is taking back the country’s canal, which was ceded to Panama in 1999 after a 20-year handover. He’s also falsely claimed that China is operating it, something Hegseth denied in a speech Tuesday.

“China did not build this canal, China does not operate this canal and China will not weaponize this canal,” Hegseth said.

The claims have put Panama’s otherwise pro-American President Raul Mulino in a difficult position — stuck denying the statements while still maintaining his relationship with Washington.

Experts on the region and former U.S. officials too have been skeptical of the threat China poses to the canal. In February, Mulino pulled Panama from the Belt and Road Initiative, a global Chinese infrastructure program. And until recently, a Hong Kong-based company had agreed to sell two ports along the canal to the U.S. firm BlackRock, though the Chinese government has since intervened to review the deal.

Calling it “key terrain,” Hegseth reinforced multiple times the importance of the canal to American trade and, potentially, a conflict in Asia. Around 100 U.S. warships pass through the canal each year, he said, and more would need to cross if a war broke out in the Pacific. A further 40% of U.S. container ship traffic transits the waterway annually as well.

Signs of discontinuity remained Wednesday after the two countries released different versions of a joint statement. The Panamanian version mentioned its sovereignty over the canal; America’s didn’t.

Asked about the difference at the day’s press conference, Hegseth argued the two countries would counter Chinese influence together.

“We certainly recognize that the Panama Canal is in Panama,” Hegseth said.

Speaking beside him, Panama’s Minister of Public Security Frank Abrego was more direct.

“He acknowledged the sovereignty of Panama over the Panama Canal,” Abrego said of Hegseth, describing their private meetings a day before.

‘Panama in the lead’

Hegseth is the second senior U.S. official to visit Panama in as many months, following a trip by Secretary of State Marco Rubio in February.

Since then, multiple outlets have reported that the Pentagon was developing plans to retake control of the canal if necessary. And Mulino publicly refuted claims by Trump during an address to Congress that America was already “reclaiming” the canal.

“I reject, on behalf of Panama and all Panamanians, this new affront to the truth and to our dignity as a nation,” Mulino wrote in a post on the social app X.

Hegseth’s visit hence took on higher value as a bellwether for the Trump administration’s approach to the region: Would it bring carrots or sticks?

In public, the secretary spoke reassuringly of the two countries’ relationship. His meetings with Mulino and other officials ran more than an hour long. In speeches, he mentioned their shared history and role building the canal in the early 1900s. And he promised to increase their military partnership, to include trainings and perhaps a larger U.S. presence.

“With Panama in the lead, we will keep the canal secure and available for all nations,” Hegseth said.

America once had a large military force in the country, including tens of thousands of troops and a school at Fort Sherman, where thousands more learned to fight in the jungle each year. It’s since dwindled to a handful of troops at any given time, with up to hundreds rotating in for exercises or trainings.

Hegseth visited Fort Sherman — or what’s left of it — late Tuesday to preview a renewed American presence there. The buildings leading up to the battery were in disrepair, with stripped away walls exposing empty concrete husks. In the weeks before Hegseth arrived, Panama’s government mowed the overgrown lawns and applied a fresh coat of paint to the abandoned battery.

“The opportunity for a more robust jungle training center — joint together between Americans and Panamanians — is a great example to the world of our deepening partnership,” Hegseth said to a group of Panamanian and U.S. forces.

America’s jungle training school has since moved to Oahu, Hawaii. The secretary didn’t specify what the future center would involve or why a new one was necessary, since Panama has another such school elsewhere in the country.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include comments from a press conference Wednesday.

British tabloids made the allegations after reports that the M-346 was being considered as a replacement for aging BAE Hawk T1 jets flown by the U.K.’s Red Arrows display team.

Leonardo worked jointly on the design of a jet trainer with Russian firm Yakovlev from 1993 to 2000 before the team-up was dissolved and each firm went on to produce their own trainers.

That did not stop the UK Sun newspaper reporting the M-346 was “Russian designed” in an article titled “Air Farce” on Monday. The daily quoted James Cartlidge, the defense spokesman for the UK’s Conservative opposition party saying, “When the Red Arrows perform their brilliant air displays, their red, white and blue vapor trails represent the Union Jack — not the Russian tricolor.”

As other tabloids picked up the story, British prime minister Keir Starmer was asked on Monday to guarantee that the Red Arrows’ next jet would not be designed by Russia.

“I can give you that guarantee – it’s very, very important that we don’t have Russian influence in Red Arrows or anything else for that matter,” said.

A spokesman for Starmer said there was no procurement plan in place to replace the Hawks.

Leonardo fought back, claiming, “The M-346 was designed, developed and produced in Europe to the most stringent NATO standards.” The Italian firm pointed out that pilots from around Europe, as well as the U.K., have already trained on the jet in Italy.

Aermacchi, the Italian jet trainer builder later purchased by Leonardo, racked up 300 flights while working on a prototype jet trainer with Russia’s Yakovlev.

But in 2000 the firms ended their collaboration when Yakovlev refused to consider using a U.S. Honeywell engine.

“There was a total disagreement – the Russians would not accept an American engine on a Russian military plane,” said Paolo Mezzanotte, who worked at Aermacchi at the time.

When the firms went their separate ways, Italy built the M-346 while Yakovlev built the Yak-130.

“The Russians went on to copy the Honeywell engine after the split, ironically producing it in Ukraine,” Mezzanotte said.

He said that the outside form of the two aircraft was similar, but the similarities stopped there.

“The manufacturing technology, the general systems, the mission systems, the propulsion and the flight control system on the M-346 is totally different. Italy did acquire the Yakovlev documentation about the plane but then redesigned it completely,” he said.

“Yakovlev had great engineers but their manufacturing at the time was at the level of Italian manufacturing in the 1950s,” he added.

The vote was 54-45, with Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as the only Republican voting against him. Three Democrats voted for Colby.

In a statement, McConnell said Colby’s “long public record suggests a willingness to discount the complexity of the challenges facing America, the critical value of our allies and partners.” And McConnell said Colby’s confirmation “encourages isolationist perversions of peace through strength to continue apace at the highest levels of administration policymaking.”

Vice President JD Vance criticized McConnell in an X post, saying that the senator’s no vote — “like so much of the last few years of his career — is one of the great acts of political pettiness I’ve ever seen.”

Vance spoke at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing early last month to urge Colby’s confirmation, saying the nominee has said things in the past that alienated Republicans and Democrats and also said things that both sides would agree on.

The vice president said Colby will be able to work with lawmakers and will strive to restore the defense industrial base, a key goal.

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Indiana, said in a post Tuesday on X that Colby “deeply understands the threat we face from communist China and is uniquely qualified to serve in this role. The Pentagon is better prepared to defend America with Bridge leading policy.”

Colby, who served as deputy assistant defense secretary for strategy during the first Trump administration, faced repeated questions from both Democratic and Republican senators during his confirmation hearing on previous statements he had made about whether Russia had actually invaded Ukraine and his suggestions that the U.S. could tolerate and contain a nuclear-armed Iran.

After initially declining several times to answer direct questions during his hearing on whether Russia invaded Ukraine, calling it a sensitive topic, Colby eventually acknowledged that Russia invaded its neighbor and poses a significant military threat to the U.S. and Europe.

Previously, Trump has falsely blamed Ukraine for starting the three-year war that has cost tens of thousands of Ukrainian lives and called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy a dictator for not holding elections during wartime. During a stunning Oval Office blowup, Trump berated Zelenskyy and said he wasn’t grateful enough for America’s support.

Tim Dill, performing the duties of deputy under secretary of defense for personnel and readiness, told reporters in a press briefing Tuesday that the military would soon send “letters of apology” to the more than 8,700 service members who were involuntarily separated, as well as instructions for how to reenlist through emails, calls, website information and social media posts.

Service members who voluntarily separated as a result of the 2021 vaccine mandate for all military personnel would also be receiving correspondence from the military encouraging them to return.

“The department is eager to welcome back those who were impacted by that vaccine mandate,” Hill said. “They never should’ve had to leave military service and the department is committed to assisting them in their return.”

The new guidelines follow President Donald Trump’s Jan. 27 executive order ordering the reinstatement of service members who separated from the military after forgoing the COVID-19 vaccine.

“In spite of the scientific evidence, the Biden Administration discharged healthy service members—many of whom had natural immunity and dedicated their entire lives to serving our country—for refusing the COVID vaccine,” a fact sheet released with the executive order said. “Government redress of these wrongful dismissals is overdue.”

The Pentagon last week formally increased the new minimum service commitment from two to four years for those discharged for refusing a lawful order to take the vaccine, The Associated Press reported.

According to AP, a Feb. 7 memo sent to the secretaries of the military services said troops would be required to sign up for two years. But a memo signed April 1 by Jules Hurst III, who is doing the job of defense undersecretary for personnel, said “reinstatement will not be afforded to those who are unwilling or unable to return to active service or active status, as applicable, for four years.”

The offer for reenlistment would be good for a year and extend until April 1, 2026, Hill said, and the administrative process for returning individuals would likely span several months.

Trump promises to bring back troops booted for refusing COVID vaccine

Though the DOD rescinded the COVID-19 vaccination mandate in 2023, Hill said the new guidelines were different in several ways.

Service members who involuntarily separated would be granted the opportunity to receive back pay for the time they otherwise would’ve been in the military, Hill said. It would include base pay, allowance for housing and subsistence and potentially medical benefits. The back pay calculation would also factor in other forms of compensation a service member received while out of service, including salary and health care.

These benefits would only apply to service members who seek to return under the new Trump administration guidelines and would not retroactively apply to those who had returned after the 2023 rescission, a number Hill estimated at under 80 service members.

“It’s also something we can seek to address but there is not currently a mechanism,” he said.

An exact calculation of back pay cost for the Defense Department was not available yet, said Hill.

“How can the department make them whole so that they would stand financially in the same position they would’ve stood in had they never been discharged?” he said.

Trump and Hegseth signed documents encouraging service members to return in a way that employed a different “tenor” than the guidance previously provided by the Biden administration to service members after the 2023 rescission of the vaccination mandate, Hill said.

Returning service members would also be assessed for medical retention standards — a test to determine whether someone who’s already been serving in the military is fit to continue — rather than traditional accession standards, which encompass a much higher level of scrutiny used to determine whether an individual prior to military experience is fit to join the military.

The Army said it has reenlisted three active duty soldiers who were discharged for refusing the COVID-19 vaccine, the AP reported. None of the other services had completed reenlistments yet, but all are reaching out to former troops.

According to Army spokesman Christopher Surridge, about 400 soldiers have inquired so far about the reenlistment program, the AP reported. Of those, about 100 are in the application process. The Army did not have estimates on how much it has given the soldiers in total back pay.

As of Friday, 472 Marines have had indicated interest in learning more about returning. The Navy said about a half dozen sailors had so far expressed interest or sought more information, and the Air Force said it had not yet gotten any feedback from service members, according to AP.

The Associated Press’ Lolita C. Baldor contributed to this report.

Editor’s note: This story has been updated to correct, based on numbers provided by the Army, how many soldiers have rejoined the service.Three active duty soldiers have reenlisted but no reservists. The Army had said more than 20 reservists reenlisted.

The command recently produced its first-ever strategies for experimentation and AI and machine learning, Gen. Stephen Whiting said Tuesday — a step toward addressing operational needs by trying out capabilities that are available today from both traditional defense companies and new entrants to the market. The experimentation strategy was completed in December 2024 and the AI strategy was just signed out in March.

Both strategies prioritize missions like missile defeat, enhanced battlespace awareness, cyber defense and space control — a term the Defense Department uses to encompass the offensive and defensive capabilities needed to ensure the U.S. and its allies can safely operate in space.

Speaking at the Space Symposium in Colorado Springs, Colorado, Whiting highlighted a slew of recent efforts — including one by Space Command’s Marine Corps component designed to fast-track commercial space domain awareness capabilities. The component found an off-the-shelf capability and, through rapid experimentation that was coupled with funding and testing, helped inform a plan to field a military-tailored solution by 2027.

That capability, Whiting said, will help Space Command better track missile threats from China.

Space Command is also using Palantir’s Maven Smart System to operationalize space combat concepts. It has integrated the AI platform — which integrates software with advanced digital capabilities to help operators distill sensor data and make faster decisions — into its Joint Operations Center, or JOC.

The JOC provides a joint operations floor for multiple services and agencies to integrate data and decision-making. The center is using Maven to streamline tactical information between Space Command and its subordinate operations centers, Whiting said.

Separately, Space Command has been testing a capability to fuse missile warning and missile defense data in a way that gives operators a single picture of the threat environment. Whiting said the command has since developed an initial data integration layer and plans to install it at the JOC. As it expands on the pilot, the plan is to iteratively feed new capabilities to the center.

Whiting also announced a new pilot program to demonstrate sustained space maneuver. In partnership with the Space Force’s innovation arm, SpaceWERX, Space Command plans to award 10 firms contracts worth $1.9 million each.

“This effort will continue to invest in the most promising technology from commercial industry to help us solve the sustained space maneuver challenges so we can bring this joint function to the space domain,” he said.