Q&A: General Kevin P. Chilton
Commander
USSTRATCOM
General Chilton is a distinguished graduate of the U.S. Air Force Academy Class of 1976. A Guggenheim Fellow, he completed a Master of Science in mechanical engineering at Columbia University. He flew operational assignments in the RF-4C and F-15 and is a graduate of the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School. Chilton conducted weapons testing in various models of the F-4 and F-15 prior to joining the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in 1987. At NASA he flew on three space shuttle missions and served as the deputy program manager for operations for the International Space Station Program.
The general has served on the Air Force Space Command staff, the Air Staff and the Joint Staff, and he has commanded the 9th Reconnaissance Wing, 8th Air Force, Joint Functional Component Command for Space and Global Strike, and Air Force Space Command.
Q: What are USSTRATCOM’s top three budget priorities in the president’s requested fiscal year 2010 budget?
A: In developing the department’s input to the 2010 budget, we focused on three primary missions—USSTRATCOM’s “lines of operation”—strategic deterrence, space and cyberspace operations. Broadly speaking, our budgetary priorities are programs aligned to support these three global mission sets. To maintain USSTRATCOM’s strategic deterrence mission, we must sustain and modernize strategic forces. America needs a safe, secure, reliable nuclear stockpile with modern delivery systems, backed by a robust and refurbished infrastructure Space assets provide the nation with vital communications, command and control, position, navigation, timing, surveillance and reconnaissance, environmental observation, and warning capabilities. In the 2010 budget, we reached agreement with mission partners on investments that will ensure uninterrupted, worldwide global satellite communications for the warfighter, and enduring, reliable strategic missile warning for national leadership.
Of our three lines of operation, cyberspace may be the least mature—but its impact on our daily lives is expanding at a remarkable rate. To correctly posture for full spectrum cyber operations, our input to the 2010 budget is to field measures required to protect our networks and develop a thoroughly trained and professional cyber work force.
Q: Describe the war fighting options gained by combatant commanders if DoD implements tenets of Conventional Prompt Global Strike Capability.
A: Over the years, the Department of Defense has invested in a broad range of forces capable of delivering a highly effective mix of advanced conventional effects. While DoD deploys expeditionary forces around the globe, it is unlikely we can or will have forces in every place we need them at the crucial moment to deter or respond to an act of aggression. Since forces can’t always be in position to respond rapidly, it is prudent for our national leadership to have options to address high value or fleeting targets at global ranges. The alternative is to suffer the consequences of enemy aggression or escalate the scale of response. By developing a prompt, global, conventional strike capability, we increase the potential military courses of action for the president and ultimately enhance and extend America’s deterrent posture.
Q: Discuss DoD’s progress to field the conventional weapon capabilities described in the National Academy of Science study.
A: The committee’s report on Conventional Prompt Global Strike Capability [CPGS] is a welcome addition to the national policy debate on this issue. The committee’s findings clearly validate the CPGS mission requirement and help shape the department’s continuing efforts to achieve a CPGS capability. Congress has supported the Prompt Global Strike Defense Wide research account. OSD Acquisition, Technology and Logistics is coordinating the department’s development and testing of critical technologies required to field a CPGS capability. Our CPGS efforts will pass a critical technology milestone in 2009, when the joint DARPA/USAF Falcon project culminates in two hypersonic technology vehicle flight tests. These technology demonstrations will support future OSD and service efforts to close the capability gap with a reliable, highly capable prompt global strike system.
Q: What is your perspective on the nation’s efforts to modernize nuclear warheads?
A: As long as others have nuclear weapons, we must sustain our capabilities to protect the U.S. and our allies against the worst possible form of attack. Today our nuclear weapons are reliable, safe and secure. The U.S, however, is facing decreasing long-term confidence in the reliability and credibility of our warheads as they age well past their design lives, at a time when the U.S. is the only nuclear weapon state not modernizing its weapons. In the absence of a modernized weapon, DoD and Department of Energy use their scientific resources to ensure the stockpile remains as reliable and sustainable as possible, and includes safety and security features not available in older designs. I am encouraged by the increasing dialogue and discussion on this important national security issue. The U.S. must make modernization investment decisions now to ensure we and our allies remain confident in our capabilities, and potential adversaries view this deterrent as credible.
Q: What are your capability concerns for DoD’s nuclear command and control system?
A: Nuclear command and control is essential to America’s deterrent capability and it hinges on assured communication. This is an area where we are putting a lot of attention because of its great importance. The Advanced Extremely High Frequency [AEHF] satellite system, when launched in FY11, will augment and eventually replace the aging MILSTAR constellation, which currently provides space-based communication. And we have recently completed upgrades to the communication suites in our ICBM launch control centers and submarines. But that’s not enough; we must continue pursuing a more robust plan for replenishment to avoid any gaps in capability. In addition, synchronizing these upgrades across the space, terrestrial and airborne systems ensures redundant, assured communication between national leaders and the units that perform the nuclear mission.
Our command and control is enhanced by the robust unitlevel training and exercises that test a unit’s procedures and sustains the unit’s proficiency. The emphasis on individual training helps ensure forces are ready and able to execute the mission. That intense training, coupled with the fact that we regularly test the communications systems and procedures, enhances our personnel and equipment readiness; sharpens responsiveness of our nuclear forces; and ensures the effectiveness of our nuclear command and control system.
Q: What is your assessment of the services’ ability to provide USSTRATCOM with operationally ready Minuteman III and other legacy weapons systems to support the spectrum of your missions?
A: I have absolute confidence in the Air Force’s ability to support USSTRATCOM’s strategic deterrence mission with the Minuteman III [MMIII] weapons system and the experts who maintain and operate them. I look to the Air Force for continued investments to improve the security and sustainment of the MMIII force, ensuring the system is sustainable through 2020. The 2007 National Defense Authorization Act directs MMIII be sustained through 2030, and both USSTRATCOM and the service understand some level of modernization is required to sustain the system through 2030, especially in the areas of support and test equipment. Our collective goal is doing what is necessary to ensure the system remains a safe, secure and reliable deterrent force.
Q: Please summarize the changes to USSTRATCOM’s responsibilities following the December 2008 signing of the updated Unified Command Plan [UCP]?
A: The 2008 UCP is more direct and detailed regarding the command’s key missions. It more clearly defines USSTRATCOM’s strategic deterrence role to include our execution, planning and advocacy roles.
From a space mission perspective, in addition to being responsible for planning and conducting space operations, the command has the additional responsibility to conduct space situational awareness operations for the U.S. government, U.S. commercial space capabilities, and services used for national and homeland security purposes; civil space capabilities and operations, particularly human space flight activities; and, as appropriate, commercial and foreign space entities.
In the war fighting domain of cyberspace, the command is responsible for synchronizing planning for cyberspace operations, and will do so in coordination with other combatant commands, the services and appropriate U.S. government agencies. In addition to operating and defending the Global Information Grid, the command plans against designated cyberspace threats and works closely with other U.S. and international agencies on cyberspace matters.
Additionally, for combating weapons of mass destruction and missile defense, USSTRATCOM is responsible for synchronizing planning for these mission areas and will do so in coordination with other stakeholders. The assignment of responsibilities in the 2008 UCP reflects the reality of limited resources and facilitates the efficient use of those resources to meet assigned responsibilities across eight global mission areas.
Q: How would you redefine the USSTRATCOM mission?
A: In short, U.S. Strategic Command provides “global security for America.” Our missions are global in nature, agnostic to lines on a map or geographic borders, and include domains [space and cyberspace] critical to U.S. national security and economy. Given the challenge of managing UCP-assigned responsibilities in a wide range of mission areas, the command is structured to support three primary lines of operation and four joint force enablers. As mentioned previously, USSTRATCOM’s primary lines of operation for which we have execution responsibilities include strategic deterrence/ nuclear operations, space operations, and cyberspace operations. We also have synchronization and advocacy responsibilities in areas vital to America’s national security. These include missile defense, surveillance and reconnaissance, information operations, and combating weapons of mass destruction. The Lines of Operation/Joint Enabler construct enables us to focus on missions where we have forces assigned which we command, as well as the important synchronization and advocacy roles for other key mission areas.
Q: How does USSTRATCOM support the joint warfighter in Iraq and Afghanistan?
A: USSTRATCOM is in direct support of the warfighter, and the capabilities we deliver are saving American lives. We support critical satellite communication links that enable unmanned aerial vehicles to relay valuable intelligence, help protect our troops, and hunt down the adversary. These links put crucial information in the hands of the warfighter quickly, allowing for decisive action. Our GPS constellation is indispensable to forward deployed troops as they navigate through the mountainous, uncharted terrain of Afghanistan. GPS also enables us to employ precision weapons to protect U.S., allied and coalition forces. In cyberspace, we operate and defend the Global Information Grid, which is essential to every operation in the theater. And lastly, our strong deterrent posture has a second order effect in that it gives us the confidence to engage on the scope and scale we do in Iraq and Afghanistan. All these capabilities enable and enhance Central Command’s successes.
Q: Anything else to add?
A: The dedicated men and women of U.S. Strategic Command— sailors, soldiers, airmen and Marines, DoD civilians, and contractors—comprise an unrivaled team that contributes immeasurably to our nation’s security. Every day, the people working at U.S. Strategic Command Headquarters, the Joint Functional Component Commands, task forces and centers around the country defend our nation and its interests. These professionals are the reason USSTRATCOM is the leader in strategic deterrence and the preeminent global war fighting command in space and cyberspace. ♦