This is a somewhat confusing picture of the battle space as we see it in the early 21st Century. My reason for showing this is simply to project the fact that it is going to be dramatically different, that the environment that we are going to be seeing is not the traditional warfighting environment. For that, we need to do the R&D that will allow us to have this sort of a battlefield, with interoperable jointness and also with coalition warfare. I will come back and talk about both of those in a minute.

New Battlespace Environment Regimes

• Extensive Interoperability

• New Forms of Power Projection (vs. Anti-Access)

• Battlefield Visibility (vs. Hiders & Movers)

• Active Defense (vs. Cruise and Ballistic Missiles) • Chem/Bio Defense

• Information Security

• Rapid Reactions to Unpredictable Events

• Coalition Operations

The regimes that are changing this battlefield are things such as the requirement for extensive interoperability, the requirement for power projection when people do not give us access-the ports, the airports will not be available to us. We will want total battlefield visibility, but against people who are moving and hiding, not just the traditional threats, again. We will need active defense against missiles, cruise and ballistic, that are again low cost and perpetuating around the world; chem/bio capabilities that we do not have now and that we need to develop and deploy; information security. I would emphasize the importance of rapid reaction. A few days of response-in fact, sustainment probably within 5 to 7 daysagainst very unpredictable threats worldwide. Last, the requirement to do all of this in a coalition environment, in which we have to share a lot of this technology with our allies. A very difficult problem, in view of trying to control it at the same time.

To address these environments, our S&T is part of an overall R&D program. We have the full complement. What we have done this year, in reorganizing, is to strengthen the role of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering. This is Dr. Marks' position. He has overall RDT&E, all of the engineering activities, essentially, within the Department of Defense oversight-service R&D, the shorter programs, the ACTD's that we have been developing, and the industry R&D, which is a key part of our overall R&D.

Now, two of the activities that are not going to be testifying here today-the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which is explicitly set up to try to address many of these new threats, and the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization, again, against cruise missiles and ballistic missiles-they do some S&T work, as well-those last two-plus the fact that we have the service S&T, the DARPA activities, and the universities all contributing to the broad science and technology activities within the Department. It is our job to try, within the Office of the Secretary of Defense, to coordinate all of this.

Security

To put the science and technology budget in perspective-and Dr. Etter is going to cover more of the details of it in terms of the budget for S&T-I thought it was important to point out that one of our objectives in our guidance that we have just put out from the Secretary, and our objective for this next 5 years, is to be able to maintain that science and technology basic investment, along with building up the procurement because of the need for modernization, as I mentioned earlier. The challenge is doing that in the presence of an increasing operation and maintenance cost for maintaining and operating the old equipment.

Technological Innovation And Information Superiority Are Critical Links Between The Four Operational Concepts of Joint Vision 2010

This is a projection of the view as seen by the Chairman, in terms of the Joint Vision 2010, the areas of focus, the dominant maneuver, precision engagement, focused logistics, and full dimensional projection. We believe that that is all driven by technological innovations and information superiority. So you will see a great deal of the focus in our science and technology area aimed in these directions. It has to be done jointly, with coalition partners. The intent here is to get mass effects, as contrasted to massed forces.