OVERNIGHT DEFENSE: Iranian fighter tangles with US drone

by Jeremy Herb and Carlo Muñoz - 03/14/13 10:14 PM ET

Last November, Iranian fighter jets opened fire on an
American surveillance drone during an intelligence-gathering operation near the
country. The U.S. aircraft did return to base unharmed, DOD said at the time.

The closest the Iranian Phantom got to the Air Force drone
and its escort team during Tuesday’s incident was 16 miles, Little noted on
Thursday. At no time during the incident did the U.S. aircraft cross into
Iranian airspace, with the entire incident taking place over international
waters, he added.

{mosads}Iran’s nuclear ambitions have only raised the stakes in the
increasingly tense situation in the Persian Gulf.

On Thursday, President Obama sought to defuse those tensions
ahead of his upcoming trip to Israel, which has suggested military action
against Iran’s nuclear facilities.

In an interview with Israel’s Channel 2 TV that aired
Thursday, Obama reiterated that a nuclear Iran is a “red line” for the
administration, and said all options were on the table to stop Iran from
obtaining a nuclear weapon.

“Right now, we think it would take over a year or so for
Iran to actually develop a nuclear weapon, but obviously we don’t want to cut
it too close,” Obama said, according to The Associated Press.

Tehran has claimed its nuclear enrichment work was driven by
strictly peaceful purposes, while the U.S., Israel and others argue Iran’s
ongoing nuclear work is putting the country on the path to acquiring a nuclear
weapon.

The Obama administration is pursuing a strategy of severe
economic and political sanctions to disrupt Iran’s nuclear program. However, the
White House has been steadfast in its claims that all options, including
military action, remain on the table.

Lawmakers just say
‘no’ to BRAC: Think lawmakers are going to be more open to new rounds of
base closures in 2014 after rejecting the Pentagon’s requests last year? Not by
the sound of Thursday’s House Armed Services hearing.

House lawmakers made clear at the Readiness subcommittee
hearing they are still “adamantly opposed” to restarting the Base Closures and
Realignment Commission (BRAC), in what amounted to a pre-emptive
strike against a potential request in the 2014 budget.

The Pentagon hasn’t said yet whether it will include a BRAC
request in its 2014 budget proposal, which will be released on April 8.

But if BRAC is included, it will likely have as much hope as
the 2013 request for two new BRAC rounds that Congress rejected last year,
lawmakers said Thursday.

“I cannot imagine in my mind any basis on which Congress
would pursue a BRAC,” Readiness subcommittee Chairman Rob Wittman (R-Va.) told
The Hill after the hearing.

DOD officials made the arguments at the hearing that the
military has excess infrastructure that needs to be cut, and that the savings
generated would help deal with the Pentagon’s budget problems.

But that did little to sway House members, who one by one
said why they didn’t want another BRAC.

Dunford goes big in
Afghanistan: The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan is
pushing for a 13,000-man force to remain in the country after the White
House’s deadline to have all American combat troops stateside by 2014.

Marine Corps Gen. Joseph Dunford and U.S. Ambassador to
Afghanistan James Cunningham voiced their support to deploy 13,600 American
forces in Afghanistan, backed by a 6,000 to 7,000-man NATO force.

Dunford and Cunningham briefed the plan to House Armed
Services Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) and panel member Rep. Duncan
Hunter (R-Calif.), who visited Afghanistan this week, according to committee
aides.

The postwar plan backed by Dunford and Cunningham falls in
line with recommendations made by former Central Command chief Gen. James
Mattis, who outlined that 13,600 U.S. force to lawmakers on March 5.

Gen. John Allen, former head of all U.S. forces in
Afghanistan, suggested as little as 6,000 U.S. soldiers or as many as 20,000
could remain in the country after 2014.

The White House has reportedly championed a postwar U.S.
force of between 8,000 and 10,000 troops. Administration officials have also
floated the notion of leaving no American soldiers behind after the withdrawal
deadline.

American ground commanders are already planning for a
“gentle” drawdown of U.S. forces in the country, in preparation for
the final 2014 withdrawal.

“Commensurate with our troop strength, there will be a
gentle reduction” in American air support and artillery units in southern
Afghanistan, as well as teams that uncover and clear improvised explosive
devices, to allow Afghan forces to pick up those missions, Maj. Gen. Robert
Abrams told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday.

Abrams, who heads Regional Command-South, noted those units
will not completely disappear from the battlefield, “but it’ll be an
overall reduction of our force over time.”

Armed Servikces leaders question sexual assault reversal: House Armed Services leaders were
the latest to ask Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel to address questions about an overturned
sexual assault verdict at a case in Aviano Air Base in Italy.

McKeon and ranking member Adam Smith (D-Wash.) headlined a
letter with 18 committee members asking Hagel to
provide answers on both the case and the underlying authority a commander has
to single-handedly toss out verdicts.

The issue is poised to be a major policy discussion in this
year’s Defense authorization bill, with calls on both the House and Senate
sides for changes to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

It was a key topic at Wednesday’s Senate Armed Services
hearing on sexual assault, where the top DOD civilian lawyer said he was going
to take a look at the policy with an open mind.

The Aviano case has fueled the latest calls for reforming
the way the military handles sexual assault.

“That decision has raised significant concerns among Members
of Congress regarding not only the appropriateness of the decision, but also
the rationale for the underlying statutory authority upon which the decision
was based. We share those concerns,”
McKeon and Smith wrote to Hagel.