WASHINGTON — A Texas university will be home to a $130 million combat development complex used by Army Futures Command.

Texas A&M University System’s RELLIS campus in Bryan will be the new home to accelerator space, laboratories and offices for the four-star command. The announcement was made in a news release Thursday after the board of regents authorized the contract.

The building will cost Texas A&M System $50 million, according to the release. It will also invest $30 million in infrastructure improvements for the new facility. The remaining $50 million was appropriated by the Texas legislature and will go toward an outdoor testing area at RELLIS.

The complex will include a kilometer-long tunnel that will make Texas A&M Engineering “the hypersonics research capital of the country,” said M. Katherine Banks, vice chancellor and dean of engineering.

The campus held a robotic combat vehicle prototyping competition in May involving six industry teams with a total of eight vehicles. The event came in anticipation of Army whitepapers and request for prototype proposals for ground vehicle robots.

Gen. John “Mike” Murray, the head of Army Futures Command, said in the release that the command would develop, test and evaluate technology from industry and universities around the country at the facility.

“We are humbled and grateful to the people of Texas, Texas elected leaders, and the Texas A&M University System for the opportunity to further develop our strategic partnership through the establishment of the combat development complex on the RELLIS Campus,” he said. “This effort will certainly prove vital as we work together to discover, develop, and test ideas and concepts that will help our Soldiers, and our future Soldiers, to protect America’s tomorrows — beginning today.”

Army Futures Command is based in Austin, Texas.

The aerospace and defense company named Mattis as a director of the corporation. General Dynamics ranks sixth on the Defense News Top 100 list with 66 percent, of its $36 billion in revenue coming from defense.

“Jim is a thoughtful, deliberate and principled leader with a proven track record of selfless service to our nation,” Phebe Novakovic, chairman and CEO, said in the release. “We are honored to have him on our board.”

Mattis, a former Marine general, is well-respected in the defense industry. He resigned as secretary of defense in December 2018 after the Trump administration announced a withdrawal of troops from Syria, citing differing views with the administration.

Mattis previously served on General Dynamics’ board of directors from August 2013 to January 2017 before taking his post as defense secretary.

The redacted report, titled “Audit of the DoD’s Management of the Cybersecurity Risks for Government Purchase Card Purchases of Commercial Off-the-Shelf Items,” was released July 26 and focuses on commercial off-the-shelf technology acquired by the Army and Air Force.

“As a result, adversaries could exploit known cybersecurity vulnerabilities that exist in COTS items purchased by the DoD,” the report read. “If the DoD continues to purchase and use COTS information technology items without identifying, assessing, and mitigating the known vulnerabilities associated with COTS information technology items, missions critical to national security could be compromised.”

The tech in question had been documented as having vulnerabilities, sometimes as long as a decade ago. However, the report states the Defense Department is increasingly dependent on these types of technology for laptops, security cameras, software and networking equipment.

The technology purchased by the Army and Air Force included:

• More than 8,000 Lexmark printers totaling $30 million. Lexmark printers contain supply chain vulnerabilities from China that were identified in a Congressional report. Lexmark has connections to the Chinese military, nuclear, and cyber espionage programs, according to the report. Lexmark has 20 listed cybersecurity vulnerabilities on the National Vulnerabilities Database. These include storing and transmitting sensitive network access credentials in plain text and allowing malicious code on a printer.
• 117 GoPro cameras costing $98,000. These cameras share video through wireless networks or Bluetooth connection, which could allow hackers to access stored network credentials and live video streams. A hacker could view a video stream, start recording, or take pictures without the user knowing.
• 1,573 Lenovo products totaling over $2 million. Congress and the Department of Homeland Security issued multiple warnings against using Lenovo computers, according to the report, following bans by the State Department (2006), DHS (2015), and the Joint Chiefs of Staff Intelligence Directorate (2016). Lenovo is the largest computer company in China. The State Department ordered a risk assessment of Lenovo products on DoD networks in 2018. However, that year the Army purchased 195 Lenovo products for just under $268,000 and the Air Force purchased 1,378 products for $1.9 million.

The report finds the Defense Department continues to use these products within its networks because it does not have an organization to deal with cybersecurity risks to commercial off-the-shelf technology or controls to prevent purchase of such technology with known cybersecurity risks. The Pentagon also hasn’t adjusted acquisition policies or established an approved products list to prevent vulnerable products from being purchased.

The report, titled “Cybersecurity of NATO’s Spaced-based Strategic Assets,” was produced by Chatham House, which is part of the Royal Institute of International Affairs, a policy institute in London. The paper, by Beyza Unal, was released July 1.

“There is an urgent need to study and address cyber-related challenges to strategic assets within NATO and its key member countries, particularly the cyberthreat to space-based command and control systems,” the report read. “The increasing vulnerability of space-based assets, ground stations, associated command and control systems, and the personnel who manage the systems, has not yet received the attention it deserves.”

The report highlights cybersecurity vulnerabilities to space systems used by countries in the NATO alliance, notably singling out commercial products used in military operations as a particular risk. These vulnerabilities can come from back-door encryption, supply chain security, and personnel and procedural practices, according to the report. NATO uses space assets to defend territory, peacekeeping missions, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief, counterterrorism, and conflict prevention.

“There is an increasing need to apply higher-grade military hardening and cyber protection specifications to civilian capabilities that have the potential to be used in support of military applications,” the report read. “If military standards are not met, items procured from commercial industry with design flaws may expose NATO’s systems to additional vulnerabilities.”

The report also points to the importance of securing satellite terminals.

“Terminals located in ground stations constitute a critical vulnerability, as a terminal is an access point to a satellite and is usually not protected by authentication in order not to hinder operational actions,” the report said. “Terminals house software systems that can be compromised and require patching and upgrading.”

Data flowing between satellites, especially ground stations, can become vulnerable, according to the report.

“Adversaries infiltrating ground- or space-based systems could exploit weak software implementation, or the incompatibility of network or data transfer protocols in the chain,” the report read. “While the absence of data is easy to detect, the manipulation of data or erosion of confidentiality at such an interface is potentially more difficult to discern.”

Among the report’s recommendations is that NATO strengthen its cyber defense through increased collaboration between the public and private sector. This would allow for more timely information sharing of cyberthreats.

The report also urges NATO to emphasize that commercial manufacturers meet basic cybersecurity standards and possibly more stringent military protection standards.

“In the future, military systems will be increasingly connected to non-military systems,” the report stated. “This has important implications for the laws of armed conflict, as the combination of civilian, commercial and military capabilities in the cyber domain and space raises the risk that civilian capabilities used for military purposes qualify as legitimate military targets.”

Advent, which has completed over 345 buyouts in 41 countries, purchased Cobham through its indirect subsidiary AI Convoy Bidco Limited.

“We have worked intensively over the last two and half years to focus on our customers and our financial and operating performance, and these fundamentals, along with the investment in the business Advent can provide, will enable us to leverage the quality of our products and services,” said David Lockwood, CEO of Cobham, in the press release. “Most of all, this offer reflects the potential for future growth and improving performance, and is an endorsement of our turnaround strategy and our hard working people.”

Cobham, which creates products for the defense, aerospace, and space industries, is ranked 57 on the Defense News Top 100 with 64 percent of its annual revenue, or $1.59 billion, coming from defense.

The deal is expected to be completed before the end of 2019, according to the press release.

The veto follows a debate in parliament on Friday that revealed divisions on the contract terms.

“The commitment of Republic of Bulgaria to obligations, for years to come, without a national consensus and conviction in the mutually acceptable conditions of the treaty, is extremely worrying,” Radev said in a statement, according to Reuters.

Bulgaria has been working to acquire fighter jets since 2017 to replace its outdated Soviet-era Mikoyan MiG-29 fighter jets. They have considered buying secondhand F-16s from Portugal, Eurofighter Typhoons from Italy and Saab JAS Gripens from Sweden.

Negotiations heated up in May after it looked like Bulgaria would walk away from buying F-16s in exchange for either Typhoons or Gripens. But in June, the U.S. State Department approved the $1.67 billion sale, putting the American aircraft back in the running for a deal with Bulgaria.

The Bulgarian Council of Ministers then followed up by approving four draft agreements for the eight F-16s for a total of almost $1.3 billion in July. However, the agreement had to be approved by the Bulgarian parliament and U.S. Congress.

It’s now unclear what the NATO member will seek to replace its MiG-29 fleet.

In advanced policy questions Esper submitted to the Senate Armed Services Committee for a July 16 confirmation hearing, the White House nominee said one way he would achieve the Defense Department’s goal to save $46 billion would be to review Fourth Estate management. He referred to a review of Fourth Estate organizations at least three times in written questions and again in his opening statement.

“We will reform the Department, beginning with the Fourth Estate,” he told Senators during the hearing.

The Fourth Estate encompasses organizations in the Pentagon which are not formal part of military departments. The list includes the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Defense Information Systems Agency, the Missile Defense Agency, the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, and the National Reconnaissance Office. A September 2018 report from the Government Accountability Office estimated that 27 agencies included in the Fourth Estate have an annual budget of at least $106 billion.

“If confirmed, I will work with the Deputy Secretary and the Chief Management Officer to review charters, budgets, infrastructures, resource needs and utilization, and key performance outputs of the Fourth Estate,” Esper said in a response to a written question on how he would improve governance and performance accountability for those organizations.

Esper was confirmed by voice vote July 19 by the Senate Armed Services Committee. The full Senate is expected to hold a confirmation vote this week.

Fourth Estate agencies came under attack in 2018 during the drafting of the defense authorization bill and were under fire again in September when a Government Accountability Office report identified inefficiencies in 19 agencies and eight field activities within the Fourth Estate.

In May, DISA announced that it would head efforts to consolidate IT for Fourth Estate agencies through the Fourth Estate Network Optimization (4NEO) effort. That effort wraps in 14 agencies, including the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, DISA, and the Missile Defense Agency.

“The objective is to move the Fourth Estate’s common use IT systems, personnel, functions, and program elements associated with the support of those systems and technologies into a single service provider architecture,” Drew Jaehnig, who is leading the 4NEO effort for DISA, said in a news release.

Lt.-Gen. Paul Wynnyk turned in his resignation letter July 9 to Gen. Jonathan Vance, the chief of the Defence Staff. Global News, which obtained the letter, reported that Wynnyk made the decision following rumors that Vance planned to replacing him with Vice-Adm. Mark Norman.

Wynnyk was made vice chief after Norman was suspended following allegations that he leaked government secrets about acquisition plans for a supply ship. The charges against Norman were stayed, as prosecution was discontinued, explained Guy Thibualt, a former vice chief.

Norman reached an agreement with the government in June. Not much is known about the agreement, but he resigned shortly after.

Thibualt explained that Wynnyk was appointed on the condition that Wynnyk would assume the vice chief position in full capacity, not as an interim vice chief. This would guarantee that Norman could not displace Wynnyk.

According to Global News reports of the letter, Wynnyk claims Vance said his service was “no longer in the best interest of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF).” Wynnyk also wrote that Vance planned to make Norman vice chief.

Thibualt said Canadian military officials usually serve no longer than 35 years or after they reach 55 years of age. Wynnyk and Norman are 55 years old.

The letter also reportedly said Wynnyk was told he could stay in the position following Norman’s disqualification. “While I appreciate the change of heart, I respectfully decline and intend to take my release from the Canadian Armed Forces as expeditiously as possible,” Wynnyk’s letter read, according to Global News.

On July 10, Wynnyk denied his resignation was tied to Norman. “I categorically would like to say that that is not the case,” he said in an interview with Global News.

Thibualt described what happened to Wynnyk as “collateral damage.” When the charges against Norman were stayed, there was a “change of heart” in relation to Norman’s and Wynnyk’s respective status, Thibualt added..

“It turns out to be … a train wreck that started a couple of years ago ,and we are seeing it played out in a way that politicians are making it into a failure of the government,” Thibualt said. “Some people are very critical of our chief of Defence Staff, but to be honest where I sit, as somebody who knows all of these players as a former vice chief, when things get rolling in a certain direction, you just have to let them play out. It’s not that people were making poor decisions. I think people were making the very best decisions they could with the information they had at the time. In this particular case, there’s no one to blame.”

On July 12, Global News reported that Lt.-Gen. Jean Marc Lanthier is expected to take on the vice chief job, becoming the fifth since 2016. Lanthier is the current commander of the Army.

“This has been a period of great upheaval for our Canadian forces and hopefully things will settle down now,” Thibualt said.

According to a new public opinion poll, 70 percent of Americans oppose arms sales to other nations and see the transactions as a threat to national security. However, when it comes to the U.S.-Saudi relationship, the Chicago Council on Global Affairs found that 50 percent of Americans feel the alliance weakens U.S. national security, while 45 percent say it does more to strengthen national security.

“Saudi Arabia has long been viewed as a valuable security partner for US grand strategy in the Middle East. As such, it has received significant military aid and equipment from the United States,” the think tank said in its findings.

Click here to see the Top 100 list of global defense companies.

As for opposition to U.S. arms sales in general, the poll found that this view crosses traditional partisan lines: 75 percent of Democrats, 70 percent of Independents and 62 percent of Republicans expressed a lack of safety associated with arms sales. “Overall, 20 percent say arms sales make no difference to US safety, while just 9 percent say they make the US safer,” the think tank reported.

The poll also found that Republicans tend to favor the U.S.-Saudi relationship, while Democrats and Independents tend to oppose it. The bilateral relationship is under criticism following Saudia Arabia’s involvement in the Yemen civil war, which has contributed to a humanitarian crisis there, and the death of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi, which has been tied to the Saudi royal family.

Members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee questioned a State Department official Wednesday over a controversial arms deal that was pushed through by the Trump administration against congressional objection.

The U.S. is the No. 1 global arms trader, according to a March 2019 report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.

A May 2019 report by the Government Accountability Office analyzed U.S. government contracts during fiscal 2015. In total, the U.S. government awarded $290.9 billion in contracts; of this, $12 billion went to firms located outside of the United States, the GAO found.

The Department of Defense awarded 80 percent of those contracts awarded to firms out of the country, according to the report. Many of those contracts went toward U.S. military efforts in the individual country.

In fiscal 2015, nearly 11,000 defense contracts were awarded for a total of $9.8 billion. This accounts for 26 percent of all U.S. government contracts to foreign firms.

“About a quarter of DOD’s $9.8 billion in aggregate award value were for purchases of fuel, oil, lubricant, and wax. About 9 percent were for education and training services, and about 7 to 8 percent each were for construction of buildings and housekeeping services,” the GAO said.