Friday, May 1, 2009

New DoD Procurement Chief Lays Out Priorities

With just four days under his belt, the Pentagon's new head of acquisition is sifting through the massive job ahead of him and establishing a to-do list that includes reviews of major procurements.

Ashton Carter, who was sworn in as the undersecretary of Defense for acquisition, technology and logistics on Monday, said Thursday that much of what would have been his first order of duty was accomplished during the lead-up to Defense Secretary Robert Gates' release of the department's budget request in early April. Gates recommended major changes in the Pentagon's procurement priorities, including cuts to a number of programs.

Nonetheless, Carter said examining troubled programs and acting on Gates' plan is his first priority. The new acquisition chief plans to review all the department's projects gradually to ensure they are being properly executed.

His second focus will be on logistics, an area he said sometimes is overlooked. With two ongoing wars and a major shift in combat operations, Carter said, attention to logistics will be crucial.

"What's ringing in my ears is the secretary of Defense's often-expressed frustration that the troops are at war but the building as a whole is not," Carter said. "I don't want him to feel that way about his acquisition operation and logistics operation."

Among the greatest challenges will be refocusing resources from Iraq to Afghanistan in President Obama's timeframe.

"We have quite a lot of stuff to move out of Iraq and into Afghanistan ... that's a non-trivial matter both to conceive and to execute, and we can't afford not to meet those timetables," Carter said.

Acquisition reform will be another priority, he noted. Carter already is looking into the appropriate role of contractors "from Blackwater security in theater to pink badges at the Pentagon" and said he wants to improve the government's ability to acquire products quickly.

Presidential and congressional interest in reforms will be an asset, he said.

"If it is going to be different than other efforts at acquisition reform, it's going to be because of that constellation of people who are interested in taking some risk to do things differently if they can see the payoff," Carter said.

Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Hill Confirmed For Iraq Post Over Opposition

By CONGRESSDAILY STAFF

The Senate voted 73-23 Tuesday to confirm Christopher Hill as U.S. ambassador to Iraq.

Hill, assistant secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific affairs since 2005, had a bumpy ride to the post, with Republican senators criticizing his past role as a negotiator on North Korea's nuclear program and his lack of experience in the Middle East. Hill was previously a U.S. ambassador to Korea, Poland and Macedonia.

All the votes against Hill came from the GOP, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Minority Whip Jon Kyl and Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

But Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Richard Lugar, D-Ind., joined 16 other Republican senators in supporting Hill's confirmation.

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Senate Votes To Finish Debate On Hill

By CONGRESSDAILY STAFF

The Senate voted 73-17 Monday to cut off debate on the nomination of Christopher Hill to be U.S. ambassador to Iraq, clearing the way for a final vote on his appointment today.

Hill, who has been assistant secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific affairs since 2005, was opposed by conservative Republicans, including Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Minority Whip Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., who criticized Hill's past role in negotiations on North Korea's nuclear program.

But Hill had support from other key GOP senators, including Foreign Relations ranking member Richard Lugar, R-Ind., to win a three-fifths majority in the cloture vote.

In other confirmation news, three assistant attorneys general won Senate approval Monday on separate votes.

San Francisco attorney Tony West was approved 82-4 to lead the Justice Department's civil division. Lanny Breuer, a Washington attorney who was a special counsel to former President Bill Clinton, was unanimously approved to become head of the criminal division. And former FTC commissioner Christine Varney won approval, 87-1, to head the department's antitrust division.

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Senate To Vote On Hill, DOJ Nominations

By CONGRESSDAILY STAFF

The Senate will vote Monday on three Justice Department nominees for assistant attorney general posts: Tony West, Lanny Breuer and Christine Anne Varney to head the department's civil, criminal and antitrust divisions, respectively.

The Senate is also scheduled to hold a cloture vote Monday on the nomination of Christopher Hill as ambassador to Iraq. Hill has drawn some GOP opposition for what lawmakers led by Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., consider inadequate attention to human rights concerns while he oversaw talks with North Korea and Hill's lack of experience in the Middle East.

Brownback discussed the Hill nomination last month with National Journal's Kirk Victor.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Senators Object To Choice For Iraq Ambassador

By CONGRESSDAILY STAFF

At least three Republican senators have said that President Obama should reconsider his choice for the next U.S. ambassador to Iraq, dimming the chances that veteran diplomat Christopher Hill could be confirmed.

Sens. John McCain of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Sam Brownback of Kansas said they were disappointed with Hill's appointment, announced Wednesday by the White House. All three senators cited a lack of experience in the Middle East to explain their opposition to Hill.

During the Bush administration, Hill led nuclear disarmament talks with North Korea. While considered a seasoned negotiator, Hill was regarded by many Republicans as too willing to make concessions to try to prod Pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons.

If confirmed, Hill would replace Ryan Crocker as America's top diplomat in Baghdad.

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

SOFA Spurs Wide-Ranging Reaction

By AMY HARDER

Columnists, editorial boards and bloggers have a lot to say -- both positive and negative -- about the Iraqi Cabinet's approval of the new status-of-forces agreement, which could help pave the way for Barack Obama's promised withdrawal of U.S. forces from Iraq. The SOFA, which sets a timeline to withdraw U.S. troops from more populous areas 2009 and out of the country entirely by 2011, still needs to be approved by the Iraqi Parliament in a vote scheduled for next week (it's expected to pass).

Here's a rundown of some of the discussion circulating online:

• The Wall Street Journal editorial board has "misgivings about the limits on U.S. forces suggested by the 2009 date," and criticizes Obama's campaign positions on Iraq.

• The Los Angeles Times supports the agreement, contending that it "sends two important messages to the international community: First, the United States truly does not plan a permanent military presence in Iraq, and second, it will not launch attacks on neighbors from Iraq."

• The National Review's Andrew C. McCarthy writes that "without the SOFA, dark choices would face both sides. For the U.S., it would mean operating illegally (at least in the eyes of the world) or withdrawing -- at the risk of forfeiting the hard-won progress of the surge and enhancing, yet again, the credibility of radical Islam's rogues who insist that Americans lack the stomach for the long, bloody fight."
  

• The Philadelphia Inquirer contends that the 2011 timeline "gives Obama more latitude to execute his plan to move troops and materiel to Afghanistan without endangering U.S. soldiers in Iraq. Perhaps before his January inauguration, Obama will also more clearly define his administration's goal in Afghanistan."
  

• The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan asserts that "the great news for Obama is that the Iraqis themselves have insisted that his fixed timetable be set in stone." This means that "the hard right" now "will be unable to say that the chaos and mass murder that will almost certainly follow in 2010 and 2011 is Obama's responsibility. It isn't."

• Writing in USA Today, the Cato Institute's Christopher Preble also highlights the fact that the SOFA is consistent with Obama's position: "The incoming administration should adhere to the Baghdad agreement and reduce -- and, in short order, eliminate the U.S. military presence, as the pact stipulates and as" Obama "has promised."
  

• Everything" that the Chicago Tribune sees "suggests that this plan is not only feasible, it is inevitable. The Iraqis want their country back. They want foreign soldiers out. They want to be in charge of their own affairs."

• State Department spokesman Sean McCormack also addressed the issue at his Monday press briefing. "If this does go forward and you have the Iraqi parliament passing it and it's approved by the Presidency Council, you will have had an agreement signed between the United States and a democratic Iraq, a democratic Iraq that is in the heart of the Middle East. And that will change the Middle East forever, for the positive."