tv U.S. Space Commander Remarks on Space Force Development CSPAN November 19, 2019 4:34am-5:38am EST
masculinity. watch live coverage of the miami book fair saturday and sunday on c-span2's "book tv." >> up next, remarks from general space commander general raymond on the operations of the newly established unified command. strengtheningses relationships with allies. >> good morning, everyone. i am the director of the international security program
here at csis and it's my pleasure to welcome you to this event today featuring general john raymond whose command of u.s. space command, and command of air force space command in colorado. we are lucky to have him join us for a public conversation with todd harrison, director of airspace security project here at csis and general raymond is going to speak first and then they will have moderated conversation following by audience q&a. there are very few things that can be considered bipartisan in nature in washington. space and space threats are one of those and so i hope you will join me in welcoming general raymond. [applause] gen. raymond: thank you. i greatly appreciate the invitation and more importantly thanks for your leadership and wise counsel. i always enjoy coming to csis and had to apologize to the cas -- csis team because i always
get more out of these engagement them i give. i hope we get to that, and have really good conversations and things i could take away and continue to work on. i will tell you about three ago, before i took the air force space command as commander job, csis held a dinner series, dr. hamre hosted a dinner series where we brought folks into talk about the challenges in space. i always marvel as i was preparing for these remarks, i marvel at what the folks that were in that dinner would think today because we have made a ton of progress. i mean a ton of progress. we have really put the accelerator down and that made
some great games. they're still a ton of work but as i reflected back on those conversations and look at where you are today, the fantasmic made, it's significant. i think the thing that is driving is one simple sentence. as 11 words in the sense. space is a war fighting to make just like air land and sea. it used to be you couldn't say that in public. space and war fighting in the same sense. the u.s. wants to keep the space domain safe and that still our goal is to deter any conflict beginning. but we didn't say that publicly. now, every speech i give i say that and usually right up front. it rolls off of our lips really easily. implications of that have really been driving my battle rhythm for the last three years as we have pretty much changed inrything in how we operate air force space command, and it is driving how we are building and standing in space command. that would really be the focus of some brief remarks upfront and then i would really like to
get to the q&a and the dialogue. it's a great opportunity for me to talk a little bit about the newest command, the 11th combatant command. u.s. space command is more than just a command focused on space. u.s. space command is really in globale department integration. if you look at national defense strategy and global challenges that we face, we are intimately involved in those conversations. they're the best in the role that space. on the between ninth of august, a ceremony at the white house and the rose garden, we got a little bit better because we stood up this command and this command is singly focused on the space command. that alone provide significant demands. it's not my tertiary or secondary job. it's my primary job. we come to work everyday focused on this demesne and providing advantage for our nation. about ago, a little over a year
ago, in august of last year, i was told hey, there is a potential we will stand up a combatant command and start planning. people in san antonio, texas and said we have to plan this command. in the evenings when i get done , i wase work i was doing huddled with the team and reviewed planning and gave direction. at the end of the week, we came out with here is how we would build this command. it is fascinating for me to be given the opportunity to begin planning and then to plan that command and then to stand it up and get it going and lead it in the beginning. it is the highlight of my career. we started with those five. we brought that plan back to peterson and set up a little tiger team of about ten people. for the next year, we planned that command, and it's pretty unprecedented if you look at doing all this in one year from
planning to standing up in a year is a pretty heroic feats. very proud of the team. today, we are about 400 and here over the next couple of months beginning next year i think our numbers will raise up to about 500 in headquarters. many of you know that we had a u.s. space command back from 1985-2002. and some might say why did we bring it back, or what's different about this command compared to the one that stood down into thousand two? 2002? as i said in the ceremony that we had at peterson air force base, this is a different command custom built for a different day. purpose built. it's purpose built to get out of the national defense strategy, its purpose built for the strategic strategy that we face today. if you look at the missions that the president signed in the
unified command plan and assigned to me as commander of the u.s.-based command, it has a much sharper focus on protecting and defending satellites. not just u.s. satellites, but our u.s. military satellites. partner, allied commercial satellites. that is a much sharper focus on offense and defense. thing, onee biggest of the biggest things is it is a geographic command. the functional combatant command didn't have an aor. it provides abilities around the globe. we stood about today, but to strengthen that, the department stood up the command is a geographic combatant command within a aware that is -- aor
that is 100 kilometers above the the earth surface, and higher. that's a big aor, really big aor. to get after that protect and defend peace, we custom built this command and we stood up a joint task force for space defense. we were first without an operational level component focus on that protect and defend mission, and so that's been very, very hopeful. as we are a geographic combatant command we are planning to have integrated planning elements that will embed in all the other combatant commands to help us stay connected with those commands. again that's purpose built. because the challenges we face in the fiction would be global challenges. that will require all combatant commands working together. we have a stronger connection with or allied partners. we have made great, great strides in that over the last few years. i'm really proud of where we are. when we stood up the command we again, purpose built a combined space force component. before, i was the commander of a joint forces command as part of
stratcom. when we stood this up, we made it operate out of the same centers and i will provide huge advantage to the folks for us and our partners. we also get additional authorities. space policy director ford mandated with what authorities does u.s. space command need to do those missions. we put those together, very hopeful those will be approved here in the very near term. ties to our partners. there are several partners i would like to focus on. one is our joint war fighting partners. again, as our national defense strategy states, the challenges we are going to face in the future are going to be global challenges. a challenge in the pacific is not just indopacom. that will require all the combatant commands together to be able to handle those challenges, for example. i'm convinced that in the future, if we were to get into a conflict with a peer or
near-peer competitor we will have to fight for space superiority. that is a joint war fighting challenge. that's a joint war fighting challenge that will require other combatant commands to be supportive of me and our u.s. space command hat. our partnership with our allies i have talked about. we have increased the training opportunities with our allies. we have exercised with our allies. we do wargames with our allies. we have stood up a space operations center. we now turn joint force space component command into a combined component command. so i see great, great -- doing close to payloads with allied partners like japan, putting a hosted payload on a satellite. doing a hosted payload ,artnership with norway as well as examples. we also have a close relationship with the interagency. our relationship with
intelligence community has never been better. our relationship between us and nro is at an all-time high. we have a standard, a shared strategy, share concept of operations. we man a c2 center called the national space defense center. i'll tell you in speeches i've given over the last couple of years, i said we have gone from preschool to about fifth-grade. a handful of hours out at the and ftc a week or so ago. i will tell you that i'm changing that. we are in high school. we have made some really really , significant gains based on the data sharing that we are able to do, based on having situational awareness tools. we have really made some great, great strides. and our partnerships with commercial industry. and i see this as a big growth area going forward. we have commercial integration satellite on the floor at the
combined force operations center. i see great steps ahead in being able to leverage this, and i talk about this, i say this in speeches it's kind of bad term two. to use in the space business but this explosion in commercial space. i think there's great opportunities ahead. so they have built this command where we have built it to meet the national defense strategy. if you look at the national defense strategy and look at the priorities of national defense strategy, rebuilding the readiness and strengthening allies and -- alliances and rebuilding the department, those are all things that u.s. space command ties into. our priorities for the command of five. first, we will transition space or fight response was from u.s. strategic command to u.s. space command in full. we have done that, we did that starting on 29 august. we are responsible for space operations. we do that day today.
not only have we not missed a beat, we have enhanced the game a little bit. we are leading this going to full operational capability and we are moving out with a sense of urgency to be able to do that. if we are already doing operations, what are the other things we are working on? requirements, component doesn't have a requirement function, a combatant command does so we are building out our requirements team. intelligence. i will tell you that may be one of the most important things that we do early on is to rebuild that intelligence function that atrophied once the u.s. space command that stood down in 2002 when away. i think the most significant thing and are highest priority action is planning. not just planning by ourselves but planning in concert with the combatant commands around the world that we partner with. why we are building these integrated planning
elements to embed with the other combatant commands. the other rarity is to expand key allies and partnership. the last one is growing fighters. that is a two-part problem. that is growing space operators that extended joint war fighting and it's building what you and i may consider more traditional joint war fighters to better understand the space. we have gone from about five people to 500. we are building that team and i'm really proud of how we brought this team together and gotten to move them really, really quickly. we have gone through a joint manpower validation process to figure out what the command is going to look like. we have hired in quite a planning element leads and stand at the first integrated planning elements both at indopacom, eu,
and struck him. ratcom. we're working very close with northcom as well. we took up, visited with africom so we're very late in with your strategic command as you can imagine, northcom, indopacom, eucom and now after, and really appreciated them. we are embedded in the global integrated east of the department so we're playing and wargames and exercises as part of that and i think that'll are we playing but helped leading the effort for the department. we've enhanced our engagements with our allies. went over and break the military committee at native to try to get a more formal relationship going with nato. nato is about to declare space as an operational domain and i think that will be very important that we have that linkage. on the planning side, we are developing the campaign plan for space. that will be done at the beginning of next year. we published our first integrated party list of having
much more of an influence on the budget, if you will, and that's again, a much more heightened voice at the combatant command level than we were at the component level. the list goes on and on, but you can kinda get a sense of where we are headed. we are ready now and we're going stronger each and every day. we are in line with the direction from the national defense strategy. we're building a fighting force to respond to the competitive congested and contested strategic and five we face today. we have a great opportunity as i tell our team that we're not wedded to the past. we are starting from scratch and so we can build this command in a way that gets after the challenges that we face. with that, i think i will close and open it up for a dialogue. i really again, appreciate the opportunity to be here. i think i'm extremely, extremely proud of the airmen, sailors, soldiers and marines that i'm
privileged to lead in the u.s. space command. i couldn't be more proud of how quickly they have come up on the step and provide an advantage to our nation, not just to our nation, but to our allied partners as well. i would like to take a minute and introduce chief tolman, our senior analyst for the command as well. he is with me. so again, i thank you for the opportunity and look forward to the dialogue. [applause] >> general raymond, i want to just say thank you again for coming here to csis to share your thoughts on the future of the united states space command. i wanted to start with kind of a basic definitional question because i was i was telling a friend earlier what i was going morning, youonday during this event with the commander of the united states space command and she asked me,
what was his job before that? because new command and i said he was command of air force space command and, of course, the question was, what's the difference? can you help define for folks what are the roles and responsibilities of air force space command and united states space command, how are they different in how they function? gen. raymond: that's a great question and what i get quite frequently. not only did i get a new job but i kept my old job as well. i get to yell at myself for the one half and get an opportunity to do that over the last couple of weeks. like you, how could you be so stupid? it's fun to have that conversation. back in the '80s there was a law that was done called the goldwater-nichols act, and the goldwater snakelike divided the department into two punks. one is organized train and equip and one is a war fighting function. services, organized and quick, army, navy, air force, marines and him a air -- in my air force space command hat, i am in the organized train and equipment business. we procure satellites, train
operators, we have the c2 capabilities to conduct those operations. organizedcused on train equipment. in that hat, i worked for the chief of staff of air force and secretary of defense. in the joint hat, in the war fighting hat, that is joint business and so the u.s. space command falls on the war fighting side. i will just, eucom, we have more fighting focus is a completely different function. in my air force hat, i organized train equipment, air force forces and i present them to myself and my use space command hat to be able to execute. i also have an army, and that is called a surface -- service component. i have an air force space command, i will also have an army component, a navy and marine service component. it's two different functions, different roles but there's a close partnership. >> so thinking ahead to the
future, one of the things congress is debating it and considering is whether or not to create a space force. can you talk about how a space force would be different? gen. raymond: absolutely. let me state i'm really eager for congress to pass this ndaa so we can have a space force. in both hats and both functions, the organized train and equip function and the war fighting function, the u.s. is looking to elevate space. entity that is singularly focused on the space domain. and so in the war fighting at we -- hat, we did that when we took a component who used to work for u.s. strategic command and elevated that to its own combatant command. similarly, on the organized side, today, air force command is a major command working for the air force. we are looking to do is elevate space into separate it from air
force and have a singularly focused service focus on this domain. in that way, it is similar to corps model.ne you have the secretary of the air force that would have both chief of staff of a space force or however the law comes out and that wouldair force work with the secretary of air force. just like in the navy side, there is a secretary of the navy that has a command of the marine corps and chief of naval operations on the navy side. >> and so u.s. space command, putting on that hat for a minute, you mentioned in your remarks how it's different this time. we used to have u.s. space command, it was a functional command. now, it has been reestablished as a geographic command. one of the rules of the geographic commands is they put together operational plans within their area of responsibility. so centcom will operational plans for contingencies that might arise in the middle east.
eucom will be responsible for europe, indopacom for the pacific region and so on. is u.s. space command developing operational plans that are exclusively for the space domain ? absolutely.: as i mentioned in my remarks that's probably the highest priority activity. we started with building the campaign plan first. we have made great progress on that. again, early next year that should be done. and then as we build our planning team, we're beginning on doing the old planning development. the thing that we are going to work really hard to do is to do that development in concert with the other combatant commands. that is why those integrated planning elements are so important. those integrated planning elements will live in those other combatant commands and help us plan together. if you look at the challenges were going to face in the future, there are global
challenges. the need to be interconnected between combatant commands is very, very important, and we will build these plans and partnership with the other combatant commands. we largely support but to also be supporting to us. >> i want to talk about kind of those organizational scenes, if you will. we already have this with the other geographic commands, you know, an old plan that might deal with russia incursion and europe could also have impacts, russia may do things in the pacific region at the same time so we already have some scenes between these different aor 's. can you talk about more detail, how are you working the scenes between your space command 100 kilometers above and all the other geographic commands that are 100 kilometers and below? especially when there might be a war fighting scenario where someone launches a missile that goes about 100 kilometers but
it's going to come back below 100 kilometers, or as part of a contingency, one of the other theaters, you know, as part of what's going on on the ground another nation may choose to a attacked their assets in space. how do you integrate those plans and who is in charge operationally if we get into a war fighting situation that starts on earth but extends into space? so, one of the, i mentioned in my remarks, if you look at the national defense strategy, it talks about global challenges. the joint staff has really been pushing under the former chairman's leadership and now with general milley, really focusing on global integration and having a globally integrated plan that addresses that. as i mentioned, if there's a conflict in one part of the
world, it's not just going to be the combatant command for that part of the world. it's going to bleed over. so, for example, in this scenario you laid out, if there is a conflict with russia, if deterrence were to fail and there is a conflict with russia, that would require eucom obviously as the primary combatant command focused in that region. it will also require the support from u.s. space command and require support from u.s. transcomm and require support from u.s. strategic command, u.s. cyber command and you can just see how those plans have to be integrated so we don't have think plan together, we it will provide good. >> in the future as we have to fight for space superiority we'll have to have combatant command.
>> you talk about deterrents, how do you think of deterrents and the space components of deterrents? >> a lot of folks ask me about space deterrents. my view there's no such thing as space deterrents. it's just deterrents. we've thought about our nuclear deterrents, but it's broader than that, there are things to do in space to amplify that deterrence message along with others. so as we look at global integrators, if you will, we have to look at who is the integrator for deterrents because each combatant command
has a deterrent role and we have to make sure that we're -- that working together, we are sending a coordinated deterrence message. our primary goal, our primary mission, i should have said this in my remarks. if you look at u.s. space command, our mission set, really, we call it the four d's. first it's the deterrents. we do not want to get into a conflict that extends into space. there are things we can do to change the calculus of a potential adversary to deter and again, doing that in concert with the other combatant commands. the second area we're focused on is to defend. i talked about, there's a sharper focus on protecting and defending the space domain. that's the second d. the third d is what we've been really good at for years, that is that we deliver capabilities for the coalition to war fight and we've done that, largely
since desert storm we've been focused on that and the fourth d i mentioned in my remarks is to develop those joint war fighters. so deter is number one, defend, deliver and develop are the four d's. >> i would note in those priorities, you're not talking about any kind of aggressive offensive actions in space. i think, you know, there have been a lot of discussions among folks outside of the military and especially in international forums worrying that the reestablishment of the united states space command and the creation of the space force is somehow signaling that the u.s. is taking a more aggressive offensive posture in space. how would you respond to those critics? >> you know, i think our mission state is clear. we're a war fighting command and any war fighting command, if you look at the mission statement, it says u.s. space command will conduct offensive and defensive operations. as i've said upfront, our goal
is to deter that from happening and deter from a position of strength. that's the best way i know how to do it. that's our primary focus. we do not want to enter into a conflict that begins or extends into space. our focus is make sure we do so from a position of strength and we have the ability to protect and defend and fuel not only our american way of life about you our american way of war. >> before we go to questions for the audience, so you guys can start getting your questions ready, i have family down in alabama and every now and then they send me articles about how, you know, u.s. space command, they're trying to pick a headquarters. i don't expect you're ready to make an announcement right now, but feel free if you are. [laughter] but what's the process that goes into figuring out, you know, where you're going to put the permanent headquarters of u.s. space command? >> so there's a basing process. the air force has been named the
lead for that process, and the air force is running that process. it's a very transparent process. it's used for all, not just u.s. space command, but all basing decisions that the airforce makes. and there's a list of candidates and those candidates are fully vetted to support the mission of the command and the air force secretary then makes that decision. so we're in that process and it's underway. >> any idea about when that process might be -- >> i don't have any idea. >> hopefully secretary-- >> i hope -- they're running that process. >> all right. i want to open it up to questions from the audience. all right, let's see. sandra, i'm going to go to you first. >> how are you? >> wait for the microphone.
>> i wanted to ask you about an initiative from air force space command that we heard, you hosted a meeting with agencies to talk about the future of space, ranges and launch facilities. you have a vision for some sort of national space port. can you give us details what you have in mind, what's going to be happening on that issue? thank you. >> sure. one of the areas i think we have great opportunity, this is on my air force space command sign. one thing we've been working on, take advantage of where commercial industry is headed. our ranges today are large ranges with lots of infrastructure, both on the east coast and the west coast. and if you look at where commercial industry is heading. commercial industry is heading toward autonomous ranges. so, today, for example, space x,
they don't use our radars, don't use our telemetry, they don't use our construct antennas, we have people on antennas if a missile were to start going astray they would send a signal to the rocket to blow it up. they do it all -- it's autonomous and that saves figure amount of dollars and saves -- and allows for a more rapid turn around of the range and a more resilient range, in my perspective. so, this focus on range of the future is all based on how do we position ourselves to get after the war fighting requirement that we're going to need from a joint capability and that's to be able to have an access to space to do it cheap, with less cost and a faster turnaround time. so we're working with -- collaboratively with commercial industry, with all the range partners, and we're furthering that dialog to see how we can
transform those ranges the best support the total population uses. >> do you need more money to do that? >> i'm hoping to do this with less money. today our ranges are significant, there's lots of infrastructure. with autonomy you get to reduce some of this infrastructure, which i think will be -- which will be very important and also a cost savings as well. >> question over here. >> thanks. good morning, sir. curt from northrop grumman. my question, sir, it seems like you're the single focal point for everything space. [laughter] and so with that, there are requirements, cdd's being developed, you talked about accelerating. you also talked about starting with a clean sheet. >> starting from what? >> from a clean sheet basically have a clean sheet. from industry's perspective
we're trying to understand where that direction is going and what the priorities are. how are you looking at requirements, cdd's that are coming out and then balancing that with the programs that are already being developed and those things that you need in the future to satisfy what you're being told you need? >> yeah, so, a couple of things. first of all, i've been -- i've tried to be as transparent as i can be with industry. one of my friends told me, all of my old friends have all retired from the military and they've all told me, you don't understand just how hard industry tries to understand what's in your head. i said, well, they don't need to try, i'll just tell them. i'll tell you. i don't want you to spend a dime trying to find out what i'm thinking.
i want you to help us get where we need to go. so we have a concept of operations how we're going to operate and i invited industry to come in and say, ok, we're going to give it to you. the problem was that they're so classified, very few could come in, so we're working hard to reduce the classification on issues that allow the conversation back and forth. i think if you look at the requirements going forward, it's not -- it's not good enough just to be able to get a satellite in orbit and have an exquisite satellite that provides exquisite capability. you also have to be able to protect and defend it and it has to be defendable. so balancing that, the mission costs and being able to defend it, are all things that we're looking at in our requirements. so as i said as a combatant command, you have a stronger voice and requirements and i think that's going to be very helpful. >> may i say one thing. >> wait for the microphone here. as loud as we can be on this
room, it somehow doesn't make it out to the internet. >> thanks, sir. understanding that, sir. when the requirements come out of the combatant command and go to the acquisition agency they then come out as requirements that we in industry respond to. those two don't align, sir. the requirements that we're responding to as industry and the expectation that you have as combatant commander, they don't align, and so that's a challenge, sir, that we in industry, we want to give you the capability that you need, but the folks who are writing the requirements, the section-- >> it's interesting. it's in my two hats. i have a foot in both camps so they better align, because if they don't align, i'm not aligned with myself. >> they don't yet, sir. >> let's have a conversation and we'll work and bring that into alignment if it's not. from what i can tell i think the alignment is -- i think we're getting much better at
alignment. i think elevating -- restanding up u.s. space command and as combatant commander, it's helped that much further. >> a question up front here. >> yes, ma'am. >> hello, sir, i'm shirley ross from the rand corporation. as we transition to more of a war fighting focus in space, can you kind of go down a level and address what human capabilities you think our service members will need to have that perhaps they do not have now? >> so let me just answer this way. i give a talk and the talk that i give, i've given it in the process of giving it to every airman in air force space command, that's trying to drive a war fighting culture. the way i describe it, there's a power point and half of the picture is sully sullenberg, everybody knows sully sullenberg, the pilot when the birds got in the engines, and safely landed the plane on the
hudson river and everybody survived. spectacular pilot, spectacular pilot. if i was on an airplane, i would want sully to be my pilot, i know i might get a little wet, but i'm going to live. [laughter] on the other half is the fighter pilot, equally spectacular and a different domain. somebody's shooting at the pilot. no one was shooting at the plane that sully was flying for. it's a different set of training. so what we've done, because we've had the luxury of it, we've grown up building sully's. we have the world's best space operators, if you want somebody to operate in space capabilities, you want the united states airmen, sailors, soldiers, marines to do that because we're worldclass trained at that. we now have to shift that to a fighter pilot mentality, have a better understanding of the threats, having a better understanding of how to operate your capabilities through those threats, having a better
understanding of potential adversaries. it's a different way of doing business, and so we have completely transformed how we go about developing our operators. we've revamped our schoolhouse over the last year and a half or so, now taught at a different classification level with threats from day one. they get -- they start learning this. we have revamped our professional development courses in space, 100, 200. space 100, 200, 300 to get more after this domain. we have recategorized our operators into four distinct mission areas to give them greater depth. so we've completely transformed how we do business, but it's to get after the shift from benign domain to war fighting domain and the best analogy i can use is sully versus the fighter pilot. yes, sir.
>> morning, sir. nice to see you. two questions for you -- >> you're only allowed one. [laughter] >> i take your point completely it's not deterrents in space, it's deterrents as applied to space, but there's an entire intellectual foundation, for example, nuclear deterrents that doesn't exist with respect to space. so as you know, over the years technology and threat have paced the policy community. you've now staked out the united states has now staked out a frontier that to many sounds very aggressive and it probably sounds all the more aggressive because we've been silent about space entirely for so long.
so inasmuch as the credibility of deterrents anywhere depends on capability, in part depends on capability, what you can point to, you don't have much you can point to. jammers, everything else is behind 27 doors and at some point there's going to have to be an impedance match, but the dna of the space community is almost 180 degrees from that. and i'd be interested on your comments on that and my second question relate today that, last time i checked there aren't a lot of planners at nro, it's also not in their dna. can you speak to the same transition you're making to the co-com's turning war fighters into space smart folks and space war fighters into joint smart. can you talk with respect to the nro? >> sure, on the first question that had like 10 questions as part of it. [laughter] you actually asked me 16
questions on that. on the first part, i would just say, again, our number one priority is to deter. i agree with your premise to deter you have to change the calculus either impose cost or deny benefits. to do that, i think that calculus is foundational to whatever deterrent. that's the foundation as deterrent. and i agree with you to do that you have to -- there's a messaging part of that and so, one of the things that we're working on is to develop that strategy on what we will talk about and what we won't talk about. that work is underway as we speak. on the second part of your question, we have a really strong partnership with the nro. the nro largely does their mission set and we largely do our mission set, but where we come together is protecting and defending. and we have -- we stood up the national space defense center, which is manned by both
organizations, and we're planning together. again, we've built con ops together, and we have a strategy, con ops, the organizations, we now are actually doing programs together. and we -- i cancelled a program that we're doing on space situational awareness, it wasn't going to meet our mission as we partner with the nro. we have something called it's an acronym. joint space war fighting forum directored by the chair and myself and we get together very frequently and talk about war fighting challenges, so i think they're coming along right with us, and alignment is really well. >> tony had his hand up in the back. >> hi, tony, bloomberg news. the national intelligence is
updating the nie on space threats from russia and china. do you think the conclusion is to show exponential advances in their capability or incremental based on what we know? and second, what mechanism do you have for taking those type of threat findings and incorporating them into acquisition requirements and programs like for gps 3, sda's, constellation and the overhead infrared constellation you're planning? >> yeah, i won't speculate on what a report that's going to come out might say. i can tell you from my perspective that scope, scale and complexity of that threat is alive and very concerning. and how do you -- how do we take information from those assessments and get those into programming? it gets back to the conversation that we talked to earlier. it's no longer good enough to think that you can build a satellite that just has to survive the launch and survive what we called infant mortality, that it comes off the launch
vehicle and operates when it first gets to space. you now have to -- you now have to be able to survive in an environment that's contested and so we've built those -- we take, we take things from that assessment and then build those into future satellite programs to make sure that we can protect and defend. our joint force and coalition partners rely on those space capabilities. every u.s. citizen relies on the space capabilities and our job is to make sure that they're always there for us. >> can i ask a related question? >> sure. >> you see a lot of the commercial space companies now are talking about building large, what we call proliferated constellations to satellites and many are small satellites and fielded in quantities of hundreds or thousands. you know, how do you think the military can utilize those kind of capabilities that are being fielded commercially and how can that help contribute to countering the threats that we're seeing and helping to deter adversaries?
>> so first of all, there is -- it's beginning. you saw, i think it was april spacex launched their first 60 satellites of star link, and a few weeks ago the second batch of 60. you're seeing the growth of all the satellites that we track. the numbers are, don't quote me on this, it's in the order of 1500 to 1600 objects in space that are satellites. the rest is debris of the high 20,000's of things that we track, small number are satellites. that number is going to change. changing significantly if these materialize. we do think, i think the biggest thing, we talked about this earlier. one of my former jobs, i worked in an office called the office of force transformation, back with a gentleman, and the project i was given at the time was to try to develop a new business model for space and that's to, you know, build the
challenge that i was given build a satellite and launch it and operate it for a year for about $10 million. it was called tac sat 1. trying to change that business model. and besides the fact the proliferated architecture with large numbers of satellites and what that might do for the protection and defending these, i think what it really does though is change the business model for space and allows you to change the risk calculus. and so if today, if we were to build a satellite and we know it's going to take a significant number of years, we put a lot of mission assurance into it because the national security of the united states rests on it and we need to make sure it works. well, and we know if it doesn't work, it's going to take another bunch of years to get another one. if you know the next one is coming off the assembly line a week from now, it changes the
calculus and allows us to move with more agility and i think what you're going to see is a hybrid approach because you also have to have the really good capabilities, but i think there's also a layer of operationally good enough capabilities that can really make a difference and change that business model which i think is so important to do. >> the gentleman back here, stand up. >> thank you. other combatant commands, africom cyber command, have a industrial base that can support them and the new-- >> as what came in? as requirements came from that command. we see it different that your command will have new innovation that's coming through as a
result of your new war fighting domain. how do you see industry, you know, now that you just finished talking about that transformation, how donning and -- how long and when do you see the hybrid for the future requirements? >> i think you're beginning to see it happening now. again, not that the explosion of companies building these capabilities, i think, are going to be very helpful to us. i think the -- i think there are two things that happened. launch costs have gone down and technology has allowed smaller satellites to do more operationally relevant. and the reduced launch costs and now operational relevance of small satellites are really going to provide us with a opportunity to leverage those going forward and i think it's coming coming. >> the industrial base a lot smaller than the other ground base or air base--
>> and i think the industrial base though expands, right? because other companies that, you know, nontraditional companies now have an ability to get into this market because-- and so i think -- i'm pretty excited where this is going. i think you also have to have a bridging strategy. you just can't -- you just can't say for the united states, we're going to turn off gps for the next five years and wait until we get to the next thing. you have to bridge. and so we're working that strategy as well. >> from an industry-- [inaudible] >> well, i would push back a little bit. we're making some progress on that front. >> i want to -- a question over here in the front. >> thank you very much, general. i'm a researcher for a german think tank affiliated with the governing conservative party and i would like to draw attention
to the, well, the u.s. engagement with nato and european allies. you mentioned nato possibly declaring it an operational domain as well as national space programs, small way or space, but still going to see the debate in europe and especially in germany. we're still lacking the sense of urgency, so when we discuss space it's more or less under commercial considerations. so my question for you would be, what are the main obstacles to transatlantic cooperation in this field? is it the technological gaps or lack of awareness? what would you like europeans to do in this respect? >> we're working hard to develop partnerships in the space business. we haven't really needed them in the past. space was a benign domain. it's critical today. we're working very closely with our five partners plus your country, france, japan, and
others. we hope to attract others. i think there's just -- there's an awareness issue that, you know, the average person in the world i don't think understands just how linked -- how their way of life is linked to space. it really fuels our collective ways of life, and i don't think that the average person understands that. i don't think that the average person understands the threat that exists today. and so, i really believe we're at this critical inflection point and i've been very -- we've got great partnership with your country. they participate in exercising with us. they participate in war games with us. i really would like to get these partnerships to need more than data sharing partnerships and
really move towards mission sharing. so, for example, well, i talked about hosted payloads on satellites, that we have other satellites that feed information into our situational awareness catalog, and we have other partnerships in our -- in communications systems, so, i think there's great opportunity here to develop capabilities that will be mutually beneficial for all of our countries and primarily, it gets back to the 16-part question that gill asked me on deterrents and, you know, we're stronger together and if we want to deter from a position of strength, that's been the core of nato, right, to deter that. and so, i really believe it gets to that foundation as well. >> all right, i see we are basically out of time here. i want to ask one final question. i know that this has been really a burning question for everyone. netflix announced they're going to create a new series about the space force starring steve
carell and john malkovic, what advice do you have for them making this show. >> i didn't plant this question. so about a year ago, i think this started to come up. so about a year and a half ago i was going through my bank statement and i see i was getting money taken out for netflix every month and i at the time really was not a netflix watcher. what am i doing this for and i canceled it. and within about 30 seconds three different places in the country, my three children, hey, what happened. [laughter] turned it back. and a year ago, my daughter said, dad, space is going big. what do you mean space is going big? they're doing a show about space and steve carell is going to play you.
he's going to have to get a hair haircut. and a twitter thing going around who is going to play who? and the big joke, who is going to play -- we're hoping it's going to be bruce willis. and so, if there is any advice i'd say get bruce willis. but in all seriousness though, people ask me about this show and it's going to be a comedy you know, and well, yeah, but i tell you, there's a bunch of excitement about space today, a bunch of excitement and every sector, if you look at you know, what nasa is doing in the civil sector, moon to mars and look at commercial industry and, you know, with all the large
constellations of satellites, and launch providers that are being developed, and then you look at what's going on in the national security space with the u.s. space command and hopefully a space force here, there's a lot of excitement. we have more people knocking on our door, how do i become a part of that? and i remember as i started off in my remarks, i remember talking about this dinner series that csis posted a few years ago and one of the things was how do you inspire the next generation of folks about space? you know, i remember, i was a little kid at west point, new york, sitting on my floor in the living room and watching a man walking on the moon. what's that today? well, i think there's lots of that today in all segments and to give you an example, two years ago, out of a thousand cadets that graduated only
13 came to space and then 35, and i made the mistake, i gave a talk to the 4,000 cadets, 2,000 cadets in the morning-- or in the evening the first hour and then freshman, sophomores and the next hour juniors and seniors. i made the mistake if i'm of any help to you i'm on the global. no kidding, e-mails are coming routinely. sir, how do i get into space? i've been set to go to job whatever, and i want to come to space. ok. and those cases that reached out i was able to find help and switch them over. that's just one example. this is a great thing for our nation that there's this excitement about this domain, which i think is going to pay huge dividends for our country going forward and i am really, really, really privileged to play a part in this. i feel very, very lucky. my whole career has been spent
in this business and to think that we're at the point where we're at today, it's really exciting and i'm excited because i think we're going to provide a significant advantage for our nation and our partners, who we partner with. i thank you for what you do and thank you for being a leading voice in this business and i really appreciate the opportunity to be here with you today and share some thoughts. thank you very much. >> well, thank you for coming. [applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2019] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
the first is with testimony from jennifer williams. and lieutenant colonel alexander goodman who serves on the national security council. later in the day, the committee hears additional testimony from tim morrison, part of the national security council, and kurt volker, the u.s. special envoy to ukraine. the house will be in order. >> for 40 years, c-span has been providing america unfiltered coverage of congress, the white court, andsupreme public policy events from washington, d.c., and around the country. 1979, c-spanble in is brought to you by your local cable or satellite provider. c-span, your unfiltered view of
government. next, supreme court justice elena kagan speaks to students at george mason university. justice kagan spoke about the legal system, her life and career and the polarization of the confirmation process for the supreme court justices. >> welcome. students, colleagues, guests, president holton, justice kagan, friends and family of roger wilken. it's my pleasure to welcome you all to the second annual roger wilkens lecture, which this year takes the form of conversation with supreme court justice elena kagan.