Pentagon and top House Armed Services Democrat defend Biden’s nixing of F-16s for Ukraine

The president’s rationale came despite a closed-door briefing for U.S. lawmakers at last month’s Munich Security Conference in which NATO’s top commander, U.S. Gen. Christopher Cavoli, reportedly advocated sending more advanced weapons, including F-16s, to help ensure Ukraine’s victory over Russia.

Here’s how the arguments unfolded at yesterday’s hearing, first from the ranking Democrat and former committee Chairman Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA), and then from Colin Kahl, the Pentagon’s undersecretary of defense for policy. Then the Washington Examiner asked retired Lt. Gen. Dave Deputa, an airpower advocate and chief architect of the 1991 Desert Storm air campaign, to weigh in with a rebuttal:

SMITH: ‘NO BLANK CHECK MEANS NO BLANK CHECK’: In his opening statement, Smith launched into a defense of Biden’s F-16 delay, arguing that after careful consideration, Biden rightly determined that sending the planes now would not be “a wise use” of resources. “That’s what no blank check means. You don’t just send it without thinking about it. We thought about it and we reached a very intelligent conclusion that this is not the right system.”

“Even if we basically said there’s nothing more important than that one weapon system and spent all of our time and all of our resources on doing it, best case scenario, we could maybe get some operational F-16s into Ukraine within a year, maybe eight months if we really pushed it,” Smith continued. “You don’t just have to train the pilots, you have to train the mechanics, you have to have airfields that can accommodate the F-16, and you have to have the spare parts to make it work.”

“And oh, by the way,” he concluded. “A fourth-generation fighter in this particular fight is going to struggle to survive. There are isolated circumstances where the Ukrainians have been able to use the MiG-29s that they have. Very isolated, because it’s a fourth-generation fighter in the face of a ton of air defense.”

KAHL: ‘TRADEOFFS THAT WE ARE MAKING IN REAL TIME’: Later in the hearing, Kahl took a crack at outlining the Pentagon’s thinking, noting that the U.S. has already spent $31.7 billion of the military aid authorized by Congress for Ukraine, and has about $12 billion left for the rest of the fiscal year.

“The Ukrainians have at times asked us for as many as 128 fourth generation aircraft, a mix of F-15s, F-18s, and F-16s. Our air force estimates that over the long term, Ukraine would probably need 50 to 80 F-16s to replace their existing air force. If you did that with new F-16s, so, say block 70/72s, that would cost ten or $11 billion. If you did it with older block 30 or 32 aircraft, and let’s imagine you only did half, 36 of those, it would still cost $2 to $3 billion,” Kahl said.

“Would it make sense to spend $3 billion on a capability that will arrive a year and a half from now, when that $3 billion is needed for Patriot interceptors or more Bradley Fighting Vehicles or more 155-millimeter ammunition, or more GMLRS?” he argued. “These are the tradeoffs that we are making in real time.”

What about training Ukrainian pilots and maintainers now, so they’ll be ready if and when F-16s are sent in the future? “Our assessment is that a delivery timeline for F-16s, even on the most expeditious timeline and the training timelines, are essentially the same. That is, they’re about 18 months,” Kahl said. “And since we haven’t made the decision to provide F-16s and neither have our allies and partners, it doesn’t make sense to start to train them on a system they may never get. I mean, they could end up getting British Tornadoes or Gripens or Mirage aircraft, and therefore you wouldn’t want to train them on F-16.”

FIGHTER JETS TO UKRAINE WOULD TAKE 18 MONTHS AFTER BIDEN APPROVAL, PENTAGON SAYS

DEPTULA: ‘YES, F-16S ARE COSTLY, BUT NOT AS COSTLY AS LOSING THE WAR’: We provided Deptula with transcripts of Smith’s remarks and Kahl’s testimony, and here is his hot take:

The Biden administration, he argues, is “embracing a strategy of attempting to win a war without using airpower.”

“The outcome of such an approach is just what we are seeing — a prolonged standoff that looks like World War I with personnel and material being fed into a meat grinder. Putin holds a distinct advantage in that sort of conflict, as time, personnel, and materiel are all on Russia’s side. That’s why Ukraine requires a significant advantage to reset the fight, and Western airpower could provide it,” he told the Washington Examiner. “They argue that providing F-16s is costly. Yes, but not as costly as Ukraine losing the war to Russia.”

Deptula also takes issue with Smith’s assertion that fourth-generation (non-stealthy) F-16s would be too vulnerable to Russian anti-aircraft missiles. “I’d suggest otherwise given an appropriately planned air campaign and training. Killing surface-to-air missiles is a primary mission of the F-16, including those made by the Russians. And with respect to Ukraine’s air defenses as a priority, the F-16 can perform that role very well also, as it does providing continental air defense for the U.S. daily.”

“Nothing will stop this war except defeat of the Russians in Ukraine, and the only way the Russians will be defeated is by supplying Ukraine with the appropriate weapons and training that will enable them to do that,” Deptula argues. “It appears that the administration position of no F-16s to Ukraine is a tacit acknowledgement that it is resigned to — or is trying to influence — a negotiated settlement, not a ‘win’ defined by ejecting Russian forces from Ukrainian territory.”

You can read Deptula’s recent op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, co-authored with Evelyn Farkas, executive director of the McCain Institute, here.

NEARLY 4,000 UKRAINIAN SERVICE MEMBERS HAVE BEEN TRAINED BY US DURING WAR

Good Wednesday morning and welcome to Jamie McIntyre’s Daily on Defense, written and compiled by Washington Examiner National Security Senior Writer Jamie McIntyre (@jamiejmcintyre) and edited by Conrad Hoyt. Email here with tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. Sign up or read current and back issues at DailyonDefense.com. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email and we’ll add you to our list. And be sure to follow us on Twitter: @dailyondefense.

CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP OR READ BACK ISSUES OF DAILY ON DEFENSE

NOTE TO READERS: Daily on Defense will be on spring break the week of March 20 to 24. We’ll return to your inbox and online Monday, March 27.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what’s going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

CHINA HEARING DEBUT: The newly formed bipartisan Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party held its inaugural hearing last night with a focus on “The Chinese Communist Party’s Threat to America.”

“We may call this a ‘strategic competition,’ but this is not a polite tennis match. This is an existential struggle over what life will look like in the 21st century — and the most fundamental freedoms are at stake,” said Chairman Mike Gallagher (R-WI) in his opening remarks. “The CCP is laser-focused on its vision for the future – a world crowded with techno-totalitarian surveillance states where human rights are subordinate to the whims of the party.”

During the prime-time hearing, House members heard from four witnesses: Matthew Pottinger, a former National Security Council official; retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, former national security adviser to former President Donald Trump; Tong Yi, a Chinese human rights advocate; and Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing.

Members “painted a bleak picture of China’s rise on the world stage and highlighted a multitude of long-standing policy failures toward Beijing,” reported the Washington Examiner’s Ryan King. Read his six takeaways here:

SIX TAKEAWAYS FROM HOUSE CHINA COMMITTEE’S FIRST PRIME-TIME HEARING

RUSSIAN CASUALTIES OFF THE CHARTS: According to a new analysis by the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Russia has suffered more combat deaths in Ukraine in the first year of the war than in all of its wars since World War II combined.

“The average rate of Russian soldiers killed per month is at least 25 times the number killed per month in Chechnya and 35 times the number killed in Afghanistan, which highlight the stark realities of a war of attrition,” the analysis concludes.

“The war in Ukraine has become a war of attrition,” in which “Ukraine and Russia have constructed trench systems and made heavy use of artillery… in an attempt to wear each other down through piecemeal destruction of matériel and personnel,” the policy brief states.

“The nature of the war in Ukraine can be most clearly seen in the fighting for Bakhmut, a small city in the Donetsk region of Ukraine. For months, Russian forces have relentlessly shelled the city, fought house to house, and used human-wave attacks to overwhelm Ukrainian defenders. Spearheaded in recent months by the Russian private military company Wagner Group, Russian efforts to take Bakhmut have included recruiting vast numbers of prisoners from around the country to throw at the front lines — in addition to the use of regular Russian soldiers. The Russian military has utilized three waves of fighters in some areas: a first line of contractors and green conscripts, whose casualty rates are often high; a second line of replacements; and a third line of relatively competent Russian forces,” the authors say. “Russia is accepting enormous casualties in return for only small amounts of territory. Despite intense fighting throughout the winter, Russia has only captured approximately 400 square miles of Ukrainian territory across the entire eastern front since September 2022.”

WALTZ: GERMANY, FRANCE, UK NEED TO STEP UP: At yesterday’s House Armed Services Committee on Ukraine, Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL), a former Green Beret, said the Biden administration needs to do more to get allies Germany and France to pick up more of the cost of supporting Ukraine.

“The United States provided $30 billion in security assistance. The next nearest is Germany at three and a half, a tenth of what we’ve provided. U.K. less than $3 billion, France less than a billion. Poor Estonia has provided three times just by percentage of GDP what France has provided,” Waltz said. “Even though our economies of the EU and the United States are roughly the same, the Europeans have provided less than half of what we have, and we haven’t even gotten into the rest that makes up the full $100 billion. Is that fair? Is that effective burden sharing?”

In response, Colin Kahl, the No. 3 official at the Pentagon, noted that while the U.S. is the top contributor in terms of total dollars, many countries are giving more as a percentage of their gross national product.

“You mentioned Estonia — and Latvia is also up there. Countries like Poland, Finland, Norway, Denmark, the Czech Republic, Sweden are all above us as a percentage of GDP,” Kahl said. “If you actually take the top 20 contributors of security assistance to Ukraine as a percentage of GDP, the United States ranks 10th.”

SIMS: ‘WE’RE AMERICANS … THIS IS WHAT WE DO: Near the end of yesterday’s hearing, Army Lt. Gen. Douglas Sims, Joint Staff operations director, was asked by Rep. Jeff Jackson (D-NC) to help him explain to the “folks back home” why support for Ukraine was so important.

“As an American, this is what we do. This is what we’ve fundamentally done for decades. When people are wronged, we stand up for them, and in this case, the invasion of Russia, everyone has said it was illegal, everybody says it was wrong, and that’s what we do,” said Sims, launching into an impromptu soliloquy on the defense of freedom.

“We came together with the allies in Europe in a way that we really haven’t done in the past 50, 60 years,” he said. “We were talking earlier about the contributions of our partners. There is more than dollars, I would argue, that is part of this. We have partners that have skin in the game.”

“That’s what we do. We’re Americans, and when somebody says ‘this is how the world should be’ and it’s not, we say ‘No,’” he said.

The Rundown

Washington Examiner: China committee chairman urgently warns of ‘existential struggle’ with Beijing: ‘Time is not on our side’

Washington Examiner: Christopher Wray says FBI believes COVID-19 ‘most likely’ originated from lab leak in Wuhan, China

Washington Examiner: GOP lawmaker suggests top US general Mark Milley ‘compromised’ by China

Washington Examiner: No US weapons have fallen into wrong hands in Ukraine, Pentagon says

Washington Examiner: Nearly 4,000 Ukrainian service members have been trained by US during war

Washington Examiner: Fighter jets to Ukraine would take 18 months after Biden approval, Pentagon says

Washington Examiner: White House considering export restrictions on China-affiliated Huawei

Washington Examiner: How Congress can confront the growing Chinese espionage threat

Washington Examiner: US-Saudi ties review ‘never about producing a homework assignment,’ White House says

Washington Examiner: FISA failures: Biden DOJ’s push to renew powers puts spotlight on controversial actions

AP: Drones fly deep inside Russia; Putin orders border tightened

The War Zone: Ukrainian Drone Gets Within 70 Miles of Moscow

New York Times: Scrounging for Tanks for Ukraine, Europe’s Armies Come Up Short

Breaking Defense: Russia Turning to North Korea, Iran for More Weapons Ahead of Spring Offensive, NATO Head Warns

Washington Post: Taiwan Needs More Top Guns as Chance of Conflict With China Grow

CNN: Agencies Have 30 Days to Ban TikTok on Government Devices, White House Says

AP: Troops who refused COVID vaccine still may face discipline

Stars and Stripes: Correcting Benefits for Medically Retired Vets a ‘Top Priority’ for Senate VA Committee, Tester Vows

19fortyfive.com: 19fortyfive.com: Putin Has No Chance to Win the War in Ukraine

19fortyfive.com: Footage Shows Ukraine Attacking Russian Positions Using Suicide Drones

19fortyfive.com: Putin’s ‘Battleship’: Meet Russia’s Deadly Kirov-Class Battlecruiser

Air & Space Forces Magazine: USAF Selects Boeing’s E-7A Wedgetail as Successor to AWACS

Air & Space Forces Magazine: Pratt & Whitney’s New Fix for F-35 Engine Issues Will Allow Deliveries to Resume

Air & Space Forces Magazine: Think Tank Leaders Recommend Top Focus Areas for House Intelligence Committee

Calendar

WEDNESDAY | MARCH 1

8 a.m. 37th and O Sts. NW — Georgetown University’s Center for Security Studies conference: “The All-Volunteer Force at 50: Civil-Military Challenges and Opportunities.” with Senate Armed Services Chairman Jack Reed, D-R.I., https://georgetown.zoom.us/webinar/register

8:30 a.m. — Henry Stimson Center virtual discussion: “Rethinking Accountability in the US Security Sector,” with Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO); Hina Shamsi, director of the American Civil Liberties Union’s National Security Project; and Annie Shiel, U.S. advocacy director at the Center for Civilians in Conflict https://www.stimson.org/event/rethinking-accountability

9 a.m. 2359 Rayburn — House Appropriations State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Subcommittee: “Oversight Hearing – United Nations,” with testimony from U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield http://appropriations.house.gov

9:30 a.m. — Center for Strategic and International Studies virtual Smart Women, Smart Power virtual conversation: “Military Deterrence in an Era of Strategic Competition,” with Army Secretary Christine Wormuth; and Kathleen McInnis, director, Smart Women, Smart Power Initiative https://www.csis.org/events/military-deterrence-era-strategic-competition

10 a.m. 2301 Constitution Ave. NW — U.S. Institute of Peace discussion: “One Year Later: Russia’s War Against Ukraine,” with former U.S. Ambassador to Ukraine Marie “Masha” Yovanovitch, senior adviser at the USIP Russia and Europe Center; Mary Glantz, senior adviser at the USIP Russia and Europe Center and former State Department fellow focused on Russia and the former Soviet Union; and Maria Snegovaya, senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies https://www.usip.org/events/one-year-later-russias-war-against-ukraine

10:30 a.m. — Center for Strategic and International Studies press briefing: “Previewing China’s 14th National People’s Congress,” with CSIS experts Jude Blanchette, Freeman chair in China studies; Scott Kennedy, senior adviser and trustee chair in Chinese business and economics; and Ilaria Mazzocco, senior fellow, trustee chair in Chinese business and economics https://www.csis.org/events/press-briefing

11 a.m. — Atlantic Council virtual discussion: “Aggressor on the UN Security Council: What does it mean for the world?” with Maksym Baryshnikov, co-founder of the Civic Hub Initiative; Thomas Grant, senior fellow at the University of Cambridge Center for International Law; Iouri Loutsenko, director of international affairs at Civic Hub; Geoffrey Nice, former prosecutor at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia; Lesia Vasylenko, member of the Ukrainian Parliament; and Oleksii Zhmerenetskyi, member of the Ukrainian Parliament https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/aggressor-on-the-un-security-council

2 p.m. — Government Executive Media Group virtual discussion: “What’s Next for Combat Aircraft in 2023?” with Douglas Royce, senior aerospace analyst at Forecast International; Shaun McDougall, senior North America analyst at Forecast International; and Daniela Fayer, publisher at Government Executive’s Defense Group https://events.govexec.com/whats-next-for-combat-aircraft-in-2023/registration/

4:30 p.m. 2121 K St. NW — International Institute for Strategic Studies discussion: “US-China tensions: New implications for the Indo-Pacific,” with James Crabtree, executive director of IISS-Asia; and Paul Fraioli, editor of IISS’ “Strategic Comments” https://www.iiss.org/events/2023/03/us-china-tensions

THURSDAY | MARCH 2

5:30 a.m. — Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies virtual discussion: “Democracy in 2023: The Battle for Ukraine and Other Challenges,” with Joan Hoey, editor of the Economist Intelligence Unit’s Democracy Index https://sais.jhu.edu/campus-events

9 a.m. 1201 Pennsylvania Ave. NW — Hudson Institute discussion: “A Test of Will: Why Taiwan Matters,” with Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-AK) https://www.hudson.org/events/test-will-why-taiwan-matters

10 a.m. — Hudson Institute event: “Building a More Resilient Indo-Pacific Security Architecture,” with Ely Ratner, assistant secretary of defense for Indo-Pacific security affairs; Lindsey Ford, deputy assistant secretary of defense for South and Southeast Asia; Patrick Cronin, Asia-Pacific security chair, Hudson Institute; and Rebeccah Heinrichs, senior fellow and director, Keystone Defense Initiative https://www.eventbrite.com/e/building-a-more-resilient-indo-pacific

11 a.m. — Government Executive Media Group discussion: “State of the Army,” as part of the State of Defense series https://d1stateofdefense.com/

11 a.m. — Center for a New American Security virtual discussion: “Russian Political Stability: Assessing How the Kremlin’s War in Ukraine is Affecting Putin’s Hold on Power,” with Timothy Frye, professor of post-Soviet politics at Columbia University; Marlene Laruelle, director of George Washington University’s Institute for European, Russian and Eurasian Studies; Brian Taylor, director of Syracuse University’s Institute of Global Affairs; Daniel Treisman, professor at the University of California at Los Angeles; and Andrea Kendall-Taylor, director of the CNAS Transatlantic Security Program https://www.cnas.org/events/virtual-event-russian-political-stability

11 a.m. — National Press Club’s Press Freedom Committee and Journalism Institute virtual discussion: “Living Under Threat: Ukraine, Russian journalists share struggles of wartime reporting,” with Elizaveta Kirpanova, former reporter at Novaya Gazeta; Olga Rudenko, editor in chief of the Kyiv Independent; Anastasia Tishchenko, human rights reporter at Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty’s Radio Svoboda; and Jessica Jerreat, editor of Voice of America’s Press Freedom https://www.press.org/events/living-under-threat

12 p.m. —New America virtual discussion: “The Invasion of Iraq – Twenty Years On,” with former U.S. Special Envoy for Syria Joel Rayburn, author of the U.S. Army in the Iraq War; Simona Foltyn, special correspondent at PBS NewsHour; and Abdulrazzaq Al Saiedi, technical expert on Iraq at Physicians for Human Rights https://www.newamerica.org/international-security/events

1 p.m. — Defense One and Babel Street virtual discussion: “Information and Insider Intelligence: Understanding and Responding to Global Chinese Influence,” with retired Army Lt. Gen. Robert Ashley, former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency; Mark Quantock, executive vice president of strategic accounts at Babel Street; and McDaniel Wicker, vice president of strategy at Babel Street https://events.govexec.com/babel-street-information-and-insider-intelligence/

2 p.m. 2720 34th St. NW — Atlantic Council conference: “Looking north: Security in the Arctic,” with Norwegian Ambassador to the U.S. Anniken Ramberg Krutnes; and former Norwegian Minister of Foreign Affairs and Defense Ine Eriksen Soreide https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event/2023-looking-north

4 p.m. 1521 16th St. NW — Institute of World Politics lecture: “No Limits Partnership: The China-Russia Information Nexus,” with Bret Schafer, senior fellow at the Alliance for Securing Democracy https://www.iwp.edu/events/no-limits-partnership

FRIDAY | MARCH 3

11 a.m. 1616 Rhode Island Ave. NW — Center for Strategic and International Studies discussion: “Pressing Challenges to U.S. Army Acquisition,” with Douglas Bush, assistant Army secretary for acquisition, logistics, and technology https://www.csis.org/events/pressing-challenges-us-army-acquisition

12 p.m. — Cato Institute virtual book discussion: “Unreliable Watchdog: The News Media and U.S. Foreign Policy,” with author Ted Galen Carpenter, senior fellow at Cato; George Beebe, director of grand strategy at the Quincy Institute; and Justin Logan, director of defense and foreign policy studies at Cato https://www.cato.org/events/unreliable-watchdog

1 p.m. — Center for a New American Security virtual discussion: “Army modernization,” with Gen. James Rainey, commander of Army Futures Command; and Douglas Bush, assistant Army secretary for acquisition, logistics, and technology https://www.cnas.org/events/virtual-fireside-chat

WEDNESDAY | MARCH 8

10 a.m. 216 Hart — Senate Select Committee on Intelligence annual hearing: “Worldwide Threats,” with testimony from heads of U.S. intelligence agencies, including Avril Haines, director of national intelligence; William Burns, director, Central Intelligence Agency; Christopher Wray, director, Federal Bureau of Investigation; Gen. Paul Nakasone, director, National Security Agency; and Lt. Gen. Scott Berrier, director, Defense Intelligence Agency https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/hearings

THURSDAY | MARCH 9

8 a.m. 2043 Rayburn — Amphibious Warship Industrial Base Coalition “Congressional Forum,” with Marine Corps Commandant Gen. David Berger; Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI); Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS); Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI); Rep. Rob Wittman (R-VA); and Rep. Joe Courtney (D-CT) https://amphibiouswarship.org/congressional-forum

THURSDAY | MARCH 23

TBA 2123 Rayburn — House Energy and Commerce Committee hearing on TikTok’s consumer privacy and data security practices, the platforms’ impact on kids, and their relationship with the Chinese Communist Party, with testimony from TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew http://energycommerce.house.gov