Quite a quote from CINCPAC (oops, I mean Commander Pacific Command):

The budget situation was one of Locklear’s main concerns, but not his No. 1 challenge -- that goes to relations with North Korea.

“North Korea remains, in my perspective, the most dangerous security threat to global security that’s out there,” Locklear said. “It’s easy to become numb or anesthetized to North Korea because our grandfathers dealt with it, our fathers dealt with it … but we can’t take our eye off of it and certainly can’t become numb to the continuous cycle of provocation in North Korea.”

Pacific Command's boss talks military challenges, opportunities

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20140820czk&_t=Pacific+Commands+boss+talks+military+challenges+opportunities#.U_aayrxdXV1

Adm. Samuel Locklear III, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, has a lot on his plate.

He discussed the challenges and opportunities within his area of responsibility -- which runs from “Hollywood to Bollywood” and includes 60 percent of the world’s population -- at an SDMAC breakfast at Naval Base Point Loma Tuesday, underscoring the important role he hopes San Diego will continue to play in the Navy’s rebalance to the Pacific, though looming budget cuts in 2016 pose a threat.

The budget situation was one of Locklear’s main concerns, but not his No. 1 challenge -- that goes to relations with North Korea.

“North Korea remains, in my perspective, the most dangerous security threat to global security that’s out there,” Locklear said. “It’s easy to become numb or anesthetized to North Korea because our grandfathers dealt with it, our fathers dealt with it … but we can’t take our eye off of it and certainly can’t become numb to the continuous cycle of provocation in North Korea.”

Escalating tensions in the East China and South China seas also topped the admiral’s challenges in his AOR, tensions that he said really stem from a resource management -- food and energy -- perspective as the world’s population climbs. He said he’s keeping an eye on Russia as well, though it doesn’t currently pose a significant threat to U.S. national security.

The rise of China is next on his list, as the country tries to amass an appropriately-sized defense fleet while maintaining transparency. China’s participation in the Rim of the Pacific exercises for the first time, and San Diego hosting a Chinese warship recently, will go a long way to this end.

Adm. Samuel Locklear III, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, spoke to attendees at an SDMAC breakfast at Naval Base Point Loma Tuesday. Staff photo by Katherine Connor

“They’re building a military that’s primarily designed, I think, to counter a U.S. capability,” Locklear said. “They are struggling with how they employ that military in a way that’s more transparent so things like bringing them into RIMPAC and bringing them to San Diego encourage that transparency.”

The last geographic-related challenge his force faces is providing humanitarian aid for an increasing number of catastrophic weather events, primarily in Southeast Asia.

The budget crisis and uncertainty surrounding the possibility of sequestration in 2016 is a major concern.

“I would say that in my time in leadership positions and in the time that I spent in budgeting and building programs for the Navy, we’re probably, from a Joint Force perspective, in the most tumultuous, uncertain time that we’ve ever been in,” Locklear said.

Should no legislative budget decision be reached in time and sequestration be put back in effect, Locklear said the maintenance and repair side of military operations would be the first to feel the pain, which doesn’t bode well for San Diego and doesn’t bode well for national security.

(Continued at the link below)

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20140820czk&_t=Pacific+Commands+boss+talks+military+challenges+opportunities#.U_aayrxdXV1

US ENDS PHILIPPINES ANTI-TERROR FORCE

Jun 26, 6:59 AM EDT APNEWSBREAK: US ENDS PHILIPPINES ANTI-TERROR FORCE BY JIM GOMEZ  ASSOCIATED PRESS HTTP://HOSTED.AP.ORG/DYNAMIC/STORIES/A/AS_PHILIPPINES_US_WAR_ON_TERROR?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2014-06-26-02-21-03

AP Photo/Aaron Favila MANILA, Philippines (AP) -- After more than a decade of helping fight Islamic militants, the United States is disbanding an anti-terror contingent of hundreds of elite American troops in the southern Philippines where armed groups such as Abu Sayyaf have largely been crippled, officials said Thursday. But special forces from the U.S. Pacific Command, possibly in smaller numbers, will remain after the deactivation of the Joint Special Operations Task Force Philippines (JSOTF-P), to ensure al-Qaida offshoots such as Abu Sayyaf and the Indonesia-based Jemaah Islamiyah do not regain lost ground, according to U.S. and Philippine officials. The move marks a new chapter in the long-running battle against an al-Qaida-inspired movement in the southern Philippines, viewed by the U.S. as a key front in the global effort to keep terrorists at bay. It reflects shifting security strategies and focus in economically vibrant Asia, where new concerns such as multiple territorial conflicts involving China have alarmed Washington's allies entangled in the disputes. A year after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the U.S. military established the task force in the southern Philippines to help ill-equipped Filipino forces contain a bloody rampage by Abu Sayyaf gunmen, who carried out bombings, terrorized entire towns and kidnapped more than 100 people, including three Americans. Although U.S. forces are barred by the Philippine Constitution from engaging in combat, the advice, training, military equipment and intelligence, including drone surveillance, that they provided helped the underfunded Philippine military beat back the Abu Sayyaf. U.S.-backed Philippine offensives whittled the militants' ranks from a few thousand fighters - mostly drawn from desperately poor hinterland villages - to about 300 gunmen, who survive on extortion and kidnappings for ransom while dodging military assaults. "Our partnership with the Philippine security forces has been successful in drastically reducing the capabilities of domestic and transnational terrorist groups in the Philippines," U.S. Embassy Press Attache Kurt Hoyer said in a written response to questions sent by email by The Associated Press. The remaining terrorists, he said, "have largely devolved into disorganized groups resorting to criminal undertakings to sustain their activities." That success has led U.S. military planners in coordination with their Philippine counterparts "to begin working on a transition plan where the JSOTF-P as a task force will no longer exist," Hoyer said, adding there were currently about 320 American military personnel left in the south. Before the drawdown, about 500 to 600 Americans had been deployed there. Hoyer said a still-unspecified number of U.S. military personnel would remain under a new unit called the PACOM Augmentation Team to provide Filipino forces with counterterrorism and combat training and advice, and "ensure that violent extremist organizations don't regain a foothold in the southern Philippines." He suggested the remaining American staff would move away from training exercises to working with Philippine security forces at unified commands and headquarters units. The timing of such withdrawals from counterterrorism campaigns from the southern Philippines to Afghanistan has been a dilemma for the U.S., which must ensure that remaining extremist forces are not able to bounce back. While Abu Sayyaf attacks have considerably gone down, ransom kidnappings have increased, with some militants even crossing into neighboring Malaysia to snatch tourists. Defense Secretary Voltaire Gazmin said Philippine officials have been notified of the U.S. move and expressed confidence that Filipino forces could deal with any lingering threat in the south, scene of a decades-long Muslim separatist rebellion in the predominantly Roman Catholic nation. Gazmin said that with the scaling down of the U.S. presence in the south, the Americans would renew a presence elsewhere in the country to help address another security concern - China's increasingly assertive behavior in the disputed South China Sea, where Beijing, Manila and four other governments have been locked in increasingly tense territorial disputes. "It's like they never left," he said. After closing down military bases in the Philippines in 1991, the U.S. signed a 10-year pact in April with Manila, a defense treaty ally, that will allow possibly thousands of American forces temporary access to selected military camps and enable them to preposition fighter jets and ships. The Philippines' efforts to protect its territory have dovetailed with Washington's aim to pivot away from years of heavy military engagement in the Middle East to Asia, partly as a counterweight to China's rising clout. --- Associated Press writers Lolita Baldor and Matthew Pennington in Washington contributed.

Special Operations in PACOM

For those with an interest in Special Operations in PACOM the latest edition of Special Warfare Magazine can be downloaded at the link below.  There is a lot of current information on OEF-P and the Typhoon response in the Philippines as well as the MNLF rebellion in Zamboanga among many other important subjects (to include UW)  per the table of contents below.

V/R
Dave

http://static.dvidshub.net/media/pubs/pdf_14790.pdf

08 1st Special Forces Group in the PACOM AOR
16 Q&A with COL Robert McDowell and CSM Brian Johnson
21 1st Special Forces Group Support Battalion
26 Relationship Building
30 1st SFG(A) Operational cycle
34 The Case for India
38 Zamboanga Crisis
46 Operation enduring Freedom - Philippines
52 Operation Damayan
59 Preparing for ODA level initial entry UW Operations in Korea
62 Foal Eagle
66 A Company in the LSF
68 UW in Cyberspace

Has Sydney scooped the media?  This is the first I have heard "spreading the theater." of Excerpt:

At a conference here last week, the four-star chief of Pacific Command made clear he sees the whole 4,000-mile arc from north to south as a strategically interconnected whole. The emerging term of art for this approach: “Spreading the theater.”

What’s the strategy behind the slogan? As different as they are in language, culture, and geography, Southeast Asia and Northeast Asia are linked by sea lanes, economics, and history. All of them must also cope with an increasingly assertive China, a problem they’ve been faced with on and off for over 2,000 years. So US policy can take advantage of those shared interests and anxieties; US action in Northeast Asia can have positive repercussions in Southeast Asia, and vice versa; and shifts on either flank can affect the balance with Beijing. ”They’re interconnected,” Adm. Samuel Locklear told me after his public remarks to the National Defense Industrial Association conference onexpeditionary warfare.

V/R
Dave 

Pacific Strategy: Adm. Locklear ‘Spreads The Theater’

By SYDNEY J. FREEDBERG JR. on November 04, 2013 at 5:55 PM

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/11/pacific-strategy-adm-locklear-spreads-the-theater/

PORTSMOUTH, VA: For decades, America’s Pacific strategy has focused on the northeast corner of that vast theater, with major forces and bases in Korea and Japan. But aseconomies boom and tensions rise in Southeast Asia, the Pentagon has played catch-up, deploying more forces to Australia, Singapore, and Guam.

At a conference here last week, the four-star chief of Pacific Command made clear he sees the whole 4,000-mile arc from north to south as a strategically interconnected whole. The emerging term of art for this approach: “Spreading the theater.”

What’s the strategy behind the slogan? As different as they are in language, culture, and geography, Southeast Asia and Northeast Asia are linked by sea lanes, economics, and history. All of them must also cope with an increasingly assertive China, a problem they’ve been faced with on and off for over 2,000 years. So US policy can take advantage of those shared interests and anxieties; US action in Northeast Asia can have positive repercussions in Southeast Asia, and vice versa; and shifts on either flank can affect the balance with Beijing. ”They’re interconnected,” Adm. Samuel Locklear told me after his public remarks to the National Defense Industrial Association conference onexpeditionary warfare.

But there’s no East Asian equivalent of NATO, I protested. While Australia, Japan, the Philippines, South Korea, New Zealand, and Thailand are all treaty allies of the United States – and Taiwan is a de facto ally – they’re not all allies of each other. So, I asked the admiral, if China starts shooting at the Japanese in the north over the Senkaku Islands, do South Pacific partners like the Philippines help out? If China starts shooting at the Filipinos over the Scarborough Shoal, do our Northeast Asian allies risk Beijing’s wrath by taking action? In short, do our allies all hang together or all hang separately?

“I always stay away from hypothetical questions,” Locklear replied, “but what I would say is that the interests of the nations in the region are tied together pretty tightly, as ours [are] with the region’s — including those of China…. Everything’s interlocked.”

Unlike the Cold War between economically separate Western and Soviet blocs, everybody in the Asia-Pacific is heavily invested in each others’ economies, including the US and China. “It’s a different world we’re in because it’s not a clear-cut divide between one set of driving interests and the other,” Locklear told me.

Admittedly, that kind of interconnection didn’t help Europe avoid World War I, but Locklear argued that East Asia wouldn’t repeat that unhappy history. “We have a rollingbilateral relationship with China,” he told me. “So I don’t mean to make it sound Pollyannish or that the situation couldn’t potentially be dangerous, but I think we’re generally [moving] in a positive direction on the Pacific as it relates to security matters — generally. That doesn’t mean we won’t have fits and starts.”

What Locklear is getting at is that the US “rebalance” to the Pacific is not just about reassuring our partners that we’ve got their backs against an increasingly assertive China: It’s also about reassuring China that it can find its place in the sun through peaceful means. If you want a visual image for this strategy, think of a long arc connecting our allies and partners, from Seoul in the north to Manila in the middle to Darwin, Australia in the south. But then you have to superimpose upon this north-south arc another line running straight east-west to represent our sometimes-fumbling outreach to China.

“The world’s not quite sure what to do with China, if it can do anything at all,” Locklear told the audience at the NDIA conference. After decades of dramatic growth, he said, “they’re now becoming a global security concern or a global security partner, depending on how you look at it.”

East Asia’s problem is that there is no structure like NATO or the European Union providing coherence and guidance. Given the region’s sheer size and diversity – it has eight times as many people as Europe and at least four major language families compared to Europe’s one (Indo-European) – it’s unlikely there ever will be. “We have to kind of figure out how to make what’s there work as best as we can,” Locklear told the group. There is a host of overlapping bilateral alliances and local multilateral organizations, mostly notably the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), to work with. “The best we can do in this century is kind of pull those together,” he said, so if a crisis erupts, “it doesn’t just tear apart.”

“Because if it tears apart,” Locklear said grimly, “we’ve got seven of the 10 largest armies in the world, we’ve got all the largest navies in the world, and we’ve got the most heavily militarized part of the world here, because they’ve got the cash.”

The risk of war weighs heavily on US military minds. In fact, the first person I heard talk of “spreading the theater” – though he attributed the concept to Locklear – was the Marine Corps’ Deputy Commandant, Lt. Gen. Kenneth Glueck, and he was definitely thinking in terms of major conflict, not just peacetime engagement.

In a head-on conflict in the East China Sea – Glueck didn’t say “with China,” but it was pretty clear what he meant – “you’re looking at more or less attrition warfare,” he told me in a sidebar conversation at the conference. (China’s land-based missile arsenal can hit US forces well out to sea and our airbases in Japan and South Korea). In that scenario,  ”we’re going tit for tat,” Glueck said, “and we can’t play that game. So what we’re going to end up doing, you talk with Adm. Locklear, he’ll spread the theater. He’ll deter, deny, and do other operations to throw them off game.” In classical military terminology, this is called exploiting “exterior lines”: China may be in the center of the theater, closer to everything that counts than we are – an advantage known as “interior lines” – but the US can turn the Middle Kingdom’s central position into a liability by striking on both flanks at once.

(Continued at the link below)

http://breakingdefense.com/2013/11/pacific-strategy-adm-locklear-spreads-the-theater/

DoD Weighs Major COCOM Realignment

From today's Early Bird and will probably be on the Defense News web site tomorrow: http://www.defensenews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/frontpage?odyssey=refresh I had only heard from rumblings about this.  These would be some significant changes - perhaps the largest amount of change at one time since the Unified Command Plan was established.  Putting Africa back into EUCOM, NORTHCOM and SOUTHCOM into an Americas or Western Command, and giving PACOM Pakistan and Afghanistan. I agree with Bob Killebrew that Combatant Command is a terrible name  I would go back to the traditional Commanders in Chief (CINCPAC, CINCEUR, CINCCENT - but I wonder about the Americas or Western Command - CINCAM or CINCWEST?). And the Pakistan and Afghanistan additions to PACOM are interesting.  It is good to recognize that those countries are in Asia and also align somewhat with other government bureaucracies but if PACOM is going to be the strategic priority and part of the unstated but somewhat accepted rationale of the Asian Pivot was to shift the focus away from Iraq and Afghanistan, won't PACOM be consumed by those problems?  Or is it because PACOM has always been an "economy of force theater" used to doing less with less and maintaining a conservative, if not somewhat risk averse stance on the use of the military instrument, so perhaps it is thought that PACOM could reduce our commitment in that area and keep the "problems" at arms length (as if that were possible).  Maybe PACOM can keep us out of trouble there. And I could not end without getting on my hobby horse:  Of course there is no mention of Korea because as I recall the only mention of Korea in the Unified Command Plan is that USFK is a subunified command of PACOM and the UNC and CFC are not part of the UCP. Defense News August 12, 2013 Pg. 1 DoD Weighs Major COCOM Realignment By Marcus Weisgerber WASHINGTON -- The Pentagon is considering a major overhaul of its geographical combatant commands, possibly realigning oversight within hot-button areas of the world and eliminating thousands of military and civilian positions, according to defense sources. While the plans for combatant command (COCOM) realignment and consolidation are still notional, sources say some options include: Combining Northern Command and Southern Command to form what some are calling “Americas Command” or “Western Command.” Dissolving Africa Command and splitting it up among European Command and Central Command. Expanding Pacific Command to include Afghanistan and Pakistan, which are part of Central Command. In all, the realignments could shutter two COCOMs and eight service-supporting commands, totaling more than 5,000 people, both uniformed and civilian. US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel for the first time hinted at consolidation of the COCOMs during a July 31 press conference when he announced significant budget-cutting options the Defense Department would have to make should federal spending cuts remain in place across the decade. Defense officials would not comment on specific consolidation plans being considered. The sequester is forcing the Pentagon to look for ways to cut spending quickly. Shuttering a COCOM would impact US relations abroad and underscores the need to eliminate the budget caps, a defense official said. “Combining combatant commands is certainly not something that we want to do but something that we have to consider because all cuts have to be on the table,” the official said. Members of the Joint Staff and other defense officials have been exploring options for COCOM realignment since last year, according to sources. Regional experts agree the Pentagon could reorganize its combatant commands to better align the headquarters with long-term strategic goals. Combining Northern and Southern commands could lead to greater resources for activities in South and Central America, which experts say has long been DoD’s most neglected region. Combining the regions could better address cross-border issues — particularly drug trafficking — among Mexico, South America and the United States, said Bob Killebrew, a retired Army colonel and senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. Mexico is part of Northern Command, which also includes the contiguous United States, Alaska and Canada. “[I]t makes ... sense not to have a kind of artificial DoD boundary, not only between Mexico and Central America, but between Mexico and the American border as well,” Killebrew said. Organizing oversight of Africa has been a topic of debate — mostly in the academic community — ever since Africa Command split from European Command and became a stand-alone COCOM in 2008. Before that, European Command oversaw much of the continent, with Central Command overseeing the Horn of Africa. “The [oversight] that was diffused over multiple commands really wasn’t something that was in our best interest nor in the best interest of our partners on the continent,” said Kip Ward, a retired Army general who was the first commander of Africa Command. Major changes to the existing Africa Command construct are not likely during a COCOM reorganization, experts say. US military operations in Africa, ranging from the 2011 overthrow of Moammar Gadhafi in Libya to the recent campaign against terrorists in Mali, underscore the need for a dedicated COCOM, defense officials say. Since its establishment, Africa Command has added value and has been well received on the continent, Ward said. “I think that the focus that AFRICOM is able to bring to that vital, important part of the world is still important,” he said. Meanwhile, experts agree that Afghanistan, Pakistan and India should fall under the same COCOM, regardless of whether it’s Pacific or Central. India falls under Pacific Command while Pakistan and Afghanistan are part of Central Command. Since security, foreign policy, economic and trade issues with India predominantly involve Pakistan and vice versa, placing them under the same COCOM could better streamline US military ties with each country, some experts say. The same is true for security and policy issues involving Afghanistan, since much of the violence in the nation is along the Pakistani border. “It’s better that the people who are dealing with India are the ones that are at least fully aware of, or completely in the picture, of what was discussed between two top dignitaries between the US and Pakistan,” said Hassan Abbas, a former Pakistani government official who served in the administrations of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto and President Pervez Musharraf. “If they are the same team, or the same group of people that are in the same institution who are dealing with India, it actually provides more leverage for the United States and more opportunities to go for a coherent policy rather than dealing through two different commands,” said Abbas, a senior adviser and fellow at the Asia Society and a professor at National Defense University’s College of International Security Affairs. He stressed that this is his personal view, and he was not speaking for the university or the US government. “I think this makes sense.” Budget-driven Changes Federal budget caps would cut about $500 billion from planned defense spending over the next decade. The caps have already cut $37 billion from the Pentagon’s 2013 budget. With that in mind, Hagel on July 31 announced the findings of the four-month-long Strategic Choices and Management Review, an effort that examined options the Pentagon could take to meet those spending targets, while trying to achieve the goals of its Pacific-focused military strategy. If the caps remain in place across the decade, “additional consolidations and mission reductions,” such as “consolidations of regional combatant commands, defense agency mission cuts and further IT consolidation” might be necessary, Hagel said. “These changes would be far-reaching and require further analysis and consideration,” he said. “Though defense bureaucracies are often derided, the fact is that these offices perform functions needed to manage, administer and support a military of our size, complexity and global reach.” The actual realignments would be laid out in the Unified Command Plan, a document that “establishes the missions, responsibilities and geographic areas of responsibility.” The Unified Command Plan — which originated in the late 1940s — is usually reviewed every two years and was last updated in April 2011. The Pentagon last shuttered a major command in 2010 when it closed US Joint Forces Command, in an attempt to trim overhead. But many of the positions associated with that command remained as the Joint Staff absorbed nearly 3,000 uniformed and civilian workers. The growth in headquarters staff sizes at the COCOMs and across the entire military has been a major issue of late. Between 2010 and 2012, staff sizes at the six geographical COCOMs have increased more than 7 percent, adding nearly 1,000 civilian and military positions. In addition to those numbers, each service operates its own subordinate commands to the individual COCOMs. Many positions at the service commands are redundant to positions at the COCOMs, according to the Government Accountability Office. “If they were to streamline or combine [COCOMs], you certainly won’t have as many components,” said Arnold Punaro, a retired Marine Corps major general and former Senate staffer who chairs the Reserve Forces Policy Board. “It depends on how they do it.” Hagel announced this summer a plan to cut COCOM headquarters and Pentagon staffs by 20 percent and reduce duplication. Pentagon officials overseeing the reorganization should also consider changing the title from combatant commanders to something less invasive, Killebrew said. “It’s a horrible [title] because what most of these commanders do is military assistance and military cooperation with other countries,” Killebrew said. “When you say you’re a combatant commander the first thing somebody in a small country says is, ‘But I don’t want to go to war. I just want to talk.’” Paul McLeary contributed to this report.

Locklear: Tensions on Korean Peninsula Highest Since War's End

Excerpt:

Locklear recognized in his prepared remarks concerns about North Korea's nuclear and missile programs and its concentration of combat forces along the demilitarized zone. But particularly troubling, he said, has been North Korea's willingness to use tactics that could cause miscalculation and spin out of control into conflict. 

These provocations "represent a clear and direct threat to U.S. national security and regional peace and stability," he said.

The Admiral is right of course but I would also recommend that we not forget about the very real possibility of regime collapse and what that will mean for us.  If the recent reports about war games concerning securing WMD and conducting humanitarian assistance on the Korean Peninsula  are accurate we here in the U.S. do not seem to have given adequate thought about preparations for such contingencies (and I specifically say we here in the US because I am confident there are those in the ROK/US Combined Forces Command that are thinking about these problems).

But we should not be thinking only of nuclear weapons and missiles (as dangerous as they are).  We need to be looking at the entire scope of the problem – provocations, war, and collapse and the interrelationship of all three.  What is happening on the Peninsula right now could lead to any combination of these contingencies, including regime collapse and we need to keep that in mind.

V/R
Dave

---------- Forwarded message ----------

From: American Forces Press Service <afps@subscriptions.dod.mil>

Date: Tue, Apr 9, 2013 at 3:52 PM

Subject: Locklear: Tensions on Korean Peninsula Highest Since War's End

To: david.maxwell161@gmail.com

You are subscribed to American Forces News Articles for U.S. Department of Defense. This information has recently been updated, and is now available. Locklear: Tensions on Korean Peninsula Highest Since War's End 04/09/2013 02:12 PM CDT Locklear: Tensions on Korean Peninsula Highest Since War's End By Donna Miles American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, April 9, 2013 - With tensions on the Korean Peninsula reaching their highest level in the 60 years since the war there ended, the United States and South Korea are prepared to defend against a North Korean attack, should one come, the U.S. Pacific Command commander told Congress today. "I am satisfied that we are ready today," Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III told the Senate Armed Services Committee. Locklear expressed confidence in the capabilities of U.S. and South Korean forces and their ability to intercept a North Korean ballistic missile if one is launched in the coming days, as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un has threatened. But expressing concern about any steps that could cause miscalculation and quickly escalate, Locklear said he would recommend such an action only after confirming where it was headed and to defend the homeland or a U.S. ally. "The best thing we as militaries can do is to preserve the peace, [and] to get it back to peace so diplomacy can work, and we would hope that could be done in North Korea," he said. "But it is a very dangerous situation. It is something we have to watch, and it could be quite volatile." North Korea dominated today's Senate hearing, originally scheduled to focus on Pacom's fiscal 2014 budget request. Army Gen. James D. Thurman, commander of United Nations Command, Combined Forces Command and U.S. Forces Korea, had been scheduled to testify alongside Locklear, but remained in South Korea to deal with the situation there. Locklear recognized in his prepared remarks concerns about North Korea's nuclear and missile programs and its concentration of combat forces along the demilitarized zone. But particularly troubling, he said, has been North Korea's willingness to use tactics that could cause miscalculation and spin out of control into conflict. These provocations "represent a clear and direct threat to U.S. national security and regional peace and stability," he said. Locklear said he felt confident that the allies have demonstrated to the North Korean leadership, as well as the American population, "our ability and our willingness to defend our nation, to defend our people, to defend our allies and to defend our forward deployed forces." The admiral told the Senate panel he is satisfied with actions being taken in response to the North Korean threat, including a B-2 bomber flight over South Korea and the planned deployment of missile defenses to Guam. The B-2 flight during the regularly scheduled Foal Eagle exercise "was a good opportunity for my forces in Pacom to coordinate with [U.S. Strategic Command], and for us to be able to demonstrate the capability," Locklear said. "And I believe that it was visibly demonstrated [and] was done at the right time to indicate the capabilities that the United States has to ensure the defense of our allies and our homeland." In addition, two Navy ships with missile defense capabilities have been positioned closer to the peninsula, and the Defense Department announced last week that Terminal High Altitude Air Defense System assets he would deploy to Guam as a precautionary measure. Locklear told the panel he agreed with the Defense Department decision to delay a routine reliability test of a Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile in light of what he acknowledged as a "particularly tenuous time." Asked by a committee member, Locklear acknowledged he wished China would play a larger role in helping to curb North Korea's provocations. "I feel they could do more," he said. The North Korean situation is influencing resourcing decisions at a time that sequestration is having a direct impact on near-term operational readiness, Locklear told the panel. Budget constraints have forced Pacom to prioritize its assets to ensure "the most pressing problems are properly addressed with the right force levels and the right levels of readiness," he said. "And today, that most pressing situation is what is happening on the peninsula in Korea." He lamented about budget impacts that will come to light over the longer term as overall readiness levels begin to decline. In some cases, he said, large-scale exercises designed to ensure future force readiness are being cancelled for lack of flight hours, transportation or funds to cover the fuel costs. The rebalance toward the Asia-Pacific region offers an opportunity to ensure the proper balance of capabilities there and to reemphasize the U.S. commitment to this vital part of the globe, Locklear said. He expressed concern, however, that sequestration and other budget shortfalls under the continuing appropriations resolution could undermine those efforts. "We have been accepting additional risk in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region for some time," Locklear told the panel. "Our rebalance strategy is in place, and we are making progress. Implementing and sustaining the strategic rebalance will require long-term, sustained commitment and resources."   Biographies: Navy Adm. Samuel J. Locklear III Related Sites: U.S. Pacific Command Special Report: U.S. Pacific Command

I Corps troops to turn focus on Pacific

Very interesting priorities articulated below  by the reporter from ADM Locklear during his visit to Ft Lewis (I will give the benefit of the doubt and assume that the reporter put them in that priority order because he has ADM Locklear saying "for instance, the climate change could make some coastal areas uninhabitable).  

But I take some exception to only thinking about the nuclear armed aspect of north Korea.  While from the "One Percent Doctrine" perspective north Korea's nuclear programs is a threat, I think the threats from north Korea are more, varied, and far worse than just the fact that it is currently a noncompliant, unsafe, nuclear experimenter trying to develop an nuclear capable ICBM for its own use and for export to Iran.  I fear war and regime collapse and those will only be made worse by the fact that it is trying to develop a nuclear capability but we should not myopically focus on its nuclear and missile program but instead try to understand the larger context and issues of north Korea and the range of threats the ROK-US Alliance faces.

But first I guess PACOM priorities are global warming, violent extremist organizations, international drug smuggling and human trafficking, pandemics and after we have those down then we can think about north Korea.

V/R

Dave

Published February 23, 2013

I Corps troops to turn focus on Pacific

ADAM ASHTON 

http://www.theolympian.com/2013/02/23/v-print/2433964/i-corps-troops-to-turn-focus-on.html

The Defense Department’s highest ranking officer in the Pacific visited Joint Base Lewis-McChord on Friday to get battle-hardened Iraq and Afghanistan veterans thinking about new challenges as diverse as climate change and rising Asian powers.

Navy Adm. Samuel Locklear’s trip sent another signal in the Pentagon’s shift in focus from wars in the Middle East to emerging threats and neglected alliances in other parts of the world.

“We can’t stay Middle East-focused forever,” Locklear, commander of U.S. Pacific Command, told Lewis-McChord’s I Corps.

The base supplied about 10,000 soldiers a year to Iraq and Afghanistan for much of the past decade. About 5,000 Lewis-McChord soldiers are in Afghanistan today, but most should be home by August.

With the wars ending, the Pentagon assigned new responsibilities to the I Corps under Locklear’s command. That means local soldiers will be expected to respond to humanitarian crises in South Asia, nurture relationships with allied armies and work to prevent large-scale conflicts from unfolding.

Locklear told I Corps soldiers that a complex Pacific environment calls on them to prepare for:

 • A warming planet causing the rise of sea levels and destabilizing Pacific countries.

 • Violent extremist groups, such as ones that have carried out terrorist attacks in India and the Philippines.

 • International narcotics smugglers and human traffickers.

 • Pandemics.

 • A nuclear-armed North Korea.

His forward-looking speech urged soldiers to study up on their new territory and to look at how the region might change in the near future. For instance, climate change could make some coastal areas uninhabitable and exacerbate natural disasters.

“The world is getting warmer,” he said. “When you potentially have millions of people impacted by weather and climate change, that’s going to have a potentially significant impact on security.”

So far, the Pentagon is protecting Lewis-McChord’s new task in the Pacific from budget cuts. Lewis-McChord soldiers over the next 12 months are on course to carry out exercises in Australia, the Philippines, Thailand, Singapore, South Korea and Japan.

(Continued at the link below)

http://www.theolympian.com/2013/02/23/v-print/2433964/i-corps-troops-to-turn-focus-on.html

CINCPAC Interview: Admiral Samuel J. Locklear

(Aside)  I know that Rumsfeld banned the use of CINC to refer to any military command as there is only one Commander-in-Chief, the President.  But I think there is something to be said for tradition so I prefer CINCPAC).  

The Admiral provides his description of the Asia Rebalance covering China, the Chinese military, the War on Terrorism, transnational crime, Indochina, Indonesia, and Cyber.  Excerpt on his view of countering terrorism:

In the long run, I believe the solution to countering terrorism lies in the professional and capable security services of our partner nations, good governance, and a general sense of prosperity for the people which will make extremist ideology less appealing and create an environment where terrorist organizations don't get the support they need and are no longer able to thrive.

V/R

Dave

The Interview: Admiral Samuel J. Locklear

http://thediplomat.com/2013/01/11/the-interview-admiral-samuel-j-locklear/?all=true

January 11, 2013

By Sergei DeSilva-Ranasinghe

America's rebalance towards Asia has many talking. The U.S. Navy will be at the forefront of such efforts. Admiral Samuel J. Locklear gives us his take.

As the United States military’s most important and largest overseas command, U.S. Pacific Command, otherwise known as PACOM, covers a jurisdiction that is half the Earth’s surface, 50 per cent of the world’s population and has one-fifth of the U.S. military’s total strength under its command. PACOM Commander,Admiral Samuel J. Locklear, spoke to Sergei DeSilva-Ranasinghe on what the upgraded U.S. presence in the region will imply, including initiatives to neutralize the growing transnational challenges like violent extremism; the impact of the pivot on relations with Indonesia and Indochina; and, importantly, the likely reverberations for U.S.-China relations.

When you say that the U.S. is rebalancing towards the Asia-Pacific, what was different about the activities of PACOM prior to the global war on terrorism?

Admiral Locklear: After the end of World War II and before 9/11 and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States had a continual presence in the Asia-Pacific. This presence enabled the growth and sustainment of a secure environment that I believe engendered economic prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region. It also facilitated th

e rise of competent militaries that are participating broadly in the security environment today.

Before 9/11, much of the resources of the U.S. military were dedicated to ongoing operations in the Asia- Pacific. Although we did pivot away from the Asia-Pacific for over ten years, we still had assets dedicated to combat operations in the region.

When you say "rebalancing", what precisely do you mean?

Admiral Locklear: U.S. involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan is coming to a close, and President Obama and the Secretary of Defense are looking to the future at what our defense force will look like post-Afghanistan and our global priorities. They recognize that the most significant national interest of the United States, and the interests of five of our seven allies and emerging partners, lies here in the Asia- Pacific.

Through rebalancing in the next few years, we want to have the right forces in the right mix in the right places in the Asia-Pacific, so that peace and security can continue to prosper in this region.The U.S. forces operating in this region, both rotational and forward stationed, are crucial to our strategy in this part of the world and ensure we have the right formal presence and are ready to provide the right assistance to our allies and partners.

At some level we are providing the right level of deterrence so we can ensure peace and security in the region. This is a continuum of our security role in northeast Asia, which is still a critical element of the overall PACOM strategy, and it will require us to take a different view of how we operate with our allies and partners and how we rotate our forces in and out with our partners and allies in several locations. For instance, in Australia we have been pursuing the cooperation between our Marine Corps and the Australian forces, specifically in Darwin. That is a good example of how we are working differently in the region in positioning ourselves to build a better collective security environment.

The United States puts together a calendar of events where countries with whom we have ongoing dialogue come together. These events include dialogue at the chiefs of defense level and at lower tiers. There can be dozens of such events and they extend from high-level talks to individual unit exercises. We host an annual Chief of Defense conference one year in Hawaii and co-host it another year in another country. In 2012, we co-hosted the conference with Australia in Sydney. We invited the Chiefs of Defense from most of the countries in this region, including India, China, Russia, Pakistan, France, and the United Kingdom, to get together and have frank discussions on their security interests. These are the type of discussions that help with commerce and lead to peace. When these don’t occur that’s when we have problems.

(Continued at the link below)

http://thediplomat.com/2013/01/11/the-interview-admiral-samuel-j-locklear/?all=true