Defense Business Brief: Tech at the edge; PACFLEET talks cyber; and more

HONOLULU—Soldiers in the Pacific need technology that works when networks are attacked and connectivity isn’t guaranteed, said Gen. Xavier Brunson, the commander of U.S. Forces Korea. 

“If the service tells you who they are and what they’re going to do, and you choose not to try to meet the requirements of how they’re going to fight—that’s going to be a problem. Because in the future, our networks will be fully under attack. I think in the future we’ll have to operate disaggregated and distributed. I think in the future, things will happen so fast, they’ll happen so fast that we won’t know sometimes what’s happening to us,” Brunson warned during a keynote Tuesday at the TechNet Indo-Pacific conference here.

“There will be plans that will change before we even get in the theater…And if your product can’t operate on the edge, then it’s not a product that’s going to be able to help the Army fight the way the Army’s going to fight, much less the joint force.” 

Brunson’s comments come as what’s known as the Davidson window, a 2027 timeline for when China’s leader has told its military it must be ready to invade Taiwan, draws near. 

But while there’s no expectation of a war with China next year, it’s something the military is still preparing for, Gen. Ronald Clark, commander of U.S. Army Pacific Command, said in his keynote address. 

“There are 157 days between today and 2 April. So that mark on the wall for us in our headquarters is to ensure that we are in position, postured forward to deter war in a window in which our adversary may find it to their advantage to attack Taiwan. But again, it’s not a date that we think that conflict will happen…But we’ll continue to prepare. We’ll continue to modernize. We’ll continue to posture ourselves for the business of deterred war well beyond [2027].”

Congress and the lack of a 2027 budget could stymie some of those modernization efforts unless lawmakers pass a full budget by December. 

Working under stopgap funding is the “biggest challenge” that affects “plans for new starts and being able to fund some of the programs that we know are going to yield benefit to the soldier,” Clark told reporters earlier this month. 

Examples include experimentation and some efforts to improve the mission partner network, he said: “You can’t start that contract if you don’t have new money. So it’s a challenge that, again, we have to overcome…we have more experience operating under a [continuing resolution] than we do with an appropriation.”

Aloha!

You’ve reached the Defense Business Brief, where we dig into what the Pentagon buys, who they’re buying from, and why. Send along your tips, feedback, and mai tai recommendations to lwilliams@defenseone.com. I live here now. Check out the Defense Business Brief archive here, and tell your friends to subscribe!

PACFLEET’s cyber needs. The Navy needs more continuous monitoring solutions for systems on ships and ashore, including products that scan for vulnerabilities, Richard Williams, who manages command, control, communication, computers, and intelligence platforms for the U.S. Pacific Fleet, said Tuesday. 

• “I would offer that we are in a zero day today. We do need more continuous monitoring, both at the shore and our ship nodes,” Williams said during a panel discussion. “We struggle with scanning and patching vulnerabilities within our networks, and having that partnership with industry and academia on how we can move quicker to do that, I think will really help us.” 
• Adding to that complexity is the need to tailor cybersecurity to different ships: Destroyers and aircraft carriers “have very various mission sets. So we need to be cognizant of what those missions are and how we can support them with cybersecurity,” he said. “So I think from industry and enterprise level, with regards to cyber, helping us with supporting us with technology to do continuous monitoring, patches and scanning, and allowing us to move quicker to keep pace with our adversaries.”

Allies + AI. Each nation has a different approach to large language models, or LLMs, which adds another layer of complexity to the work required for the U.S. military to be on the same page as allies and partners.  

• “We’ve got different approaches to LLMs in our respective countries,” including planning with a different ecosystem and decision-making process, said Australian army Brig. Chris Alder, the vice director for intelligence at Indo-Pacific Command. 
• The first challenge is engaging with partners, he said during a panel Wednesday: “Understanding how [an ally’s] respective partners are approaching their own challenges is a key start point. So working through our liaisons that we’ve got within PACOM to get the right points of contact to have those discussions has been really important. And to be frank, knowing which industry partnerships countries are pursuing has often been accommodating for discussions.” 
• A little more: Nations in the Pacific have varying levels of AI adoption and implementation—and many are not using frontier models, said Scott Brunstetter, U.S. Indo-Pacific Command’s chief AI officer. 
• “There are some exceptions to that,” where some are building “their own smaller capabilities. So each journey has been a little bit different…it comes back to starting with foundations and how do we understand everything from governance and workforce training, things like that,” Brunstetter said. 
• He requested that companies proactively help bridge the divide to help the U.S. understand where partner nations are, technologically: “You all have some very interesting and insightful tools, and as you engage with partners out there, circle back with us. Help us understand where that partner was. Because the other side of this is partners don’t have a whole lot of money in some cases, and so they’re looking for…cheaper options. So there’s a wide open opportunity there.”
• A related, haunting thought: When it comes to AI, there’s a lingering concern around data security. And there’s one question senior leaders should be asking themselves more: “How would they know if the models and AI systems that they are using have been poisoned? And it’s giving them subtle and incorrect answers over time—how would you detect that?” Brad Christ, the University of Hawai’i’s chief information officer, said in a separate panel. “And I don’t think that there’s an answer.”

Making moves + other news

• The Army expands testing sites for commercial drone use. 
• SAIC has a quantum portfolio.
• General Atomics completed flight testing with Saab’s LoyalEye, an advanced early warning system, on the MQ-9B Reaper drone.  
• Energetics and propulsion startup Firehawk is now valued at more than $1.4 billion after closing a Series D funding round of $150 million. The round was led by Advent and Rochefort Asset Management.
• Beacon AI’s autonomous pilot tech took flight with KC-46 tankers.