Moving the Army at the speed of relevance

OPINION:

In the last 18 months, the Pentagon has moved through an unusually rapid period of institutional change: new priorities and funding, faster fielding of emerging technologies and new ways of doing business with industry.

Nowhere is that transformation more apparent than in the United States Army.

The Army Transformation Initiative (ATI), Drone Dominance Program, Project Janus and Joint Interagency Task Force (JIATF)-401 are just a few examples of new Army initiatives.

Programs established years ago have also been accelerated to breakneck speeds: Future Long-Range Assault Aircraft, M1E3, counter-UAS technologies, Next Generation Command and Control (NGC2) and more.

Speed matters. The threat environment we face today and more importantly, the threats we face tomorrow require the U.S. military to start operating as if conflict is going to break out at a moment’s notice.

There is immense promise on the horizon for the Army.

For years I have been banging the drum that operational resilience starts with energy. Fuel and supply convoys were frequent targets during two decades of conflict in the Middle East. In a Pacific contingency, the tyranny of distance and an adversary capable of contesting our supply lines would make sustainment even more difficult.

The Army’s Janus Program is an important step toward resilient, independent power at military installations. We should also continue examining how deployable advanced energy technologies can reduce operational risk and support computing, long-range fires, and other power-intensive capabilities in contested environments.

If we have learned anything from the conflict in Ukraine, it is that denied and degraded environments will be the status quo in warfare. Command and control (C2) between forces, but also between humans and machines, is the key enabler to success on the modern battlefield.

The Army is tackling that challenge through the NGC2 program. NGC2 is leveraging flexible and rapid acquisition pathways to move expeditiously while leaning into open architectures that enable agile iteration and increase competition.

Technology has repeatedly reshaped the battlefield. Today, unmanned systems and the weapons to defeat them are doing so at extraordinary speed.

In 2000 BCE, it was the chariot. In the 1400s, it was the cannon. Armored ships in the Civil War. Machine guns in World War I. And jet-powered aircraft in the mid-20th century.

Today, it’s unmanned systems and defenses.

The Army, for its part, is scaling the Drone Dominance Program and drone marketplace to develop, test and deploy small unmanned aerial systems. And, in last year’s National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), Congress codified JIATF-401 as the counter-drone test, evaluation, and procurement hub.

Amidst all this change, we must be mindful of the right way and the wrong way to go about institutional reforms.

Here’s the wrong way: undertake sweeping reorganizations, propose major divestments and accelerate nascent technologies without giving Congress the budget details, tradeoffs, risk assessments and end-state vision necessary to understand where the Army is headed. Congress wants to be, and is, a willing and able partner to affect these changes, but we cannot be effective without knowing where we’re heading. That is why the House-passed FY27 National Defense Authorization Act includes my language requiring the Army to report annually to Congress on its transformation decisions, including the capabilities it is fielding, the capabilities and capacity it is divesting, and the rationale behind those choices. This is not to be an overbearing overseer, but to be a better partner.

The Pentagon and the Army need to move fast. They need to experiment rapidly, identify failures early, learn from them and incorporate those lessons before flawed approaches are scaled across the force.

But funding, resources and, most importantly, time, are finite.

As Congress moves to finalize the NDAA and pass appropriations bills, here is how we can better empower the Army:

First, we need to prioritize more flexible funding, especially at the critical juncture when an Other Transaction Authority ends and capabilities need to move into scaled production.

Second, we must ensure there are off-ramps from legacy systems and on-ramps into next-generation system procurement.

Third, we need to better leverage technologies for test and evaluation, such as digital twins and virtual modelling.

Lastly, we need to supercharge our efforts to maintain our equipment, both in terms of funding and process.

I know the Army is up to the task at hand. And Congress will continue to be a willing and able partner to move at the speed of relevance.

But, in the words of the late, great country singer Jerry Reed: we have a long way to go and a short time to get there.

• Rep. Rob Wittman serves as vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee and the House Natural Resources Committee. Prior to his election in Congress, he spent 26 years working for the Virginia Department of Health’s Division of Shellfish Sanitation and as an environmental health specialist for local health departments in Virginia’s Northern Neck and Middle Peninsula regions.