Presslink Media

Can AI help in improving U.S. military logistics?

Posted on by John

Washington, DC – November 4, 2024 Paolo von Schirach, President, Global Policy Institute; Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Bay Atlantic University, both in Washington, DC shared that The Wall Street Journal recently published an article highlighting what may be one of the biggest challenges that the U.S. military will face in case of a prolonged conflict in faraway regions: grossly inadequate logistics.

Logistics? How could that be so important? We all thought that victory would be secured by futuristic, high-tech weapons expertly managed by scientists-soldiers sitting in the next generation vehicles designed as command centers. The term logistics conjures up images of trucks delivering food or blankets to the front lines. Routine missions about low tech, boring stuff. Well, not so. General Omar Bradley, undoubtedly one of the top US commanders in WW II, famously said that “Amateurs study strategy, professionals study logistics.”

For sure, victory requires superior numbers of well-equipped, and well-trained armed forces. However, those soldiers, especially when operating in faraway battle zones, must receive a steady supply of all the ammunition, fuel, spare parts, replacements for lost or damaged equipment, they need. And, yes, they will also need food, drinking water and medicine. In war, none of these items are optional. Think of a state-of-the-art tank that runs out of fuel or ammunition in the middle of a battle. Suddenly, logistics failure turned the futuristic tank into useless junk.

How did we get here? In WW II, the U.S. created a gigantic logistics machine that kept millions of soldiers operating in the Pacific and European theatres fully supplied. But it could do this because America had many shipyards that built innumerable merchant ships to ferry essential supplies, under U.S. navy escort. Large numbers were sunk by enemy submarines. But U.S. shipyards built more, and so the war effort could continue, unabated, without major logistical disruptions.

Fast forward to today and you see a completely different picture. The U.S. armed forces have an exceedingly small number of military transport ships. Besides, America no longer has a merchant marine worth the name. Ships are not built anymore in America. (There is also limited shipyard capacity to build combat vessels for the U.S. Navy).

To make thigs worse, the U.S. is facing China, a hostile power that can rely on an incredibly large and robust Chinese merchant navy now dominating global shipping, not to mention Chinese ultra-modern freight railways and ports. It is obvious that all these gigantic vessels will be used by the Chinese navy in case of war. The U.S. does not have anything even approaching this capability. As the WSJ put it: “China’s rise has exposed America’s shipping weakness. Beijing isn’t just Washington’s biggest military rival. It is also by far the world’s biggest logistics operation.”

So, what can be done to fix this huge strategic shortcoming? Enter the Pentagon’s Transportation Command, or Transcom, the heart of U.S. military logistics. They are doing their best to build war plans, with the full cooperation of all major commercial shipping companies, so that in case of war their resources can be immediately and efficiently mobilized in support of any campaign in Asia or Europe. Still, the challenge is immense. The WSJ story quotes Jaqueline Van Ovost, recently retired Transcom commander: “Logistics underwrites everything. You can’t outrun your logistics.”

Is there a solution to this huge problem? We know that Artificial Intelligence, AI, by processing enormous amounts of data, can produce novel ways to maximize results with better utilization of existing resources. Can AI help solve this logistics challenge? Some analysts believe it can.

Writing for U.S. Army, (Future of Army Logistics | Exploiting AI, Overcoming Challenges, and Charting the Course Ahead, August 1, 2023), Col. Everett Bud Lacroix seems confident that AI will provide a significant efficiency boost to U.S. military logistics by optimizing the deployment and coordination of all components.

“A significant benefit of AI in adaptive logistics is its capacity to gather and analyze extensive data from various sources, including sensors, satellites, and other intelligence platforms. In addition, AI can access systems of record data from different Army source systems, like the Global Command and Control System-Army, Logistics Modernization Program, port automation tool, and Transportation Coordinators’ Automated Information for Movements System II. AI can also leverage non-Army systems such as the Global Decision Support System and Logistics Functional Area Services. This comprehensive data analysis enables more informed decision-making and efficient logistics operations.”

While AI can help, the Pentagon in 2022 seemed pessimistic about improving overall capabilities. A Defense Department Report quoted by the same WSJ article stated that American logistics resources “are inadequate to support operations specifically in a contested environment.”

In simple terms, America has inadequate logistics resources (ships, crews, antiquated port facilities and warehouses) to effectively support expeditionary forces in faraway war zones, such as the Western Pacific. And these inadequacies may be insurmountable when the enemy will do its absolute best to sink your small number of resupply ships before they reach their destination to fulfill their missions.

For sure, AI will maximize –in ways beyond our imagination–the efficiency of existing assets. But AI cannot create a brand-new cargo fleet for America’s military fighting across the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. This will require major investments. Starting now.

Legal Disclaimer:

PressLink distributes this news content on an “as-is” basis, without any express or implied warranties of any kind. PressLink expressly disclaims all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented in this article. Any complaints, copyright issues, or concerns regarding this article should be directed to the author.

Note:

This content is not authored by, nor does it reflect the endorsement of, PressLink, its advertisers, or any affiliated entities. For inquiries or corrections related to press releases, please contact PressLink directly.

Presslink Media

Innovation Ecosystems

Posted on by John

Washington, DC – Oct 29, 2024 Paolo von Schirach, President, Global Policy Institute; Professor of Political Science and International Relations at Bay Atlantic University, both in Washington, DC shared insights regarding innovation ecosystems. What is the magic formula for successful technological innovation? In broad terms, we know.

You need a country with a sizable market that can absorb commercially viable innovations, state of the art infrastructure, some great research universities that breed top notch scientists and managers with great new ideas, robust capital markets, availability of risk capital and venture capitalists that can harness it, rule of law and independent courts, zero corruption, enforceable patent laws. We all know that these are the necessary ingredients. However, in practice, nobody really knows what the right mix should be.

Let me explain with an example. Everyone knows about Silicon Valley, a world-famous tech hub located in Northern California. Erroneously, many believe that Silicon Valley is the fruit of a great strategic plan. They assume that brilliant minds gathered near San Francisco and conceived the Big Idea of creating the world’s most important tech hub by attracting skilled talent and new companies.

Well, nothing of this sort ever happened. Not even close. In truth, Silicon Valley came together almost by accident. Forget about strategic plans. Silicon Valley got started for very mundane reasons. Land rich Stanford University after WWII was in serious financial difficulties. It needed money. Hence the idea of leasing some of its land to businesses. The university’s hoped that this way it could raise some revenue.

There is broad agreement that Frederick Terman, a Stanford professor, was behind the almost accidental birth of Silicon Valley. It was Terman who thought about contacting Stanford alumni William “Bill” Hewlett and David Packard. He convinced them to start their electronics company near the Stanford Campus. They agreed. And this is how, later, Hewlett-Packard, now universally known as HP was born.

While there was an effort to attract additional tech companies, nobody had any idea that these entities, almost magically, would give life to a unique, self-propelled, ecosystem. An ecosystem that would evolve in impossible to predict directions, giving life to the Silicon Valley phenomenon, a true American tech icon, and the envy of the world.

Thus, the real story of Silicon Valley is the lack of any strategic plans. Silicon Valley is the lucky product of the combination of a variety of components that, via trial and error, in a rather anarchic environment, formed partnerships, attracted talent from everywhere, spawned new companies that sometimes merged with others. This unique environment, overtime, became a powerful magnet for academics, investors, venture capitalists, and bright graduate students who created new start-ups. These various actors, sometimes collaborating, sometimes competing, gave life to Silicon Valley.

Fine. As we know all this, can we “reverse engineer” this phenomenon, so that we can understand the role played by the various components, thus gaining the “recipe” for replicating Silicon Valley? The answer is no. While many have studied the phenomenon, there is no indication that anybody around the world ever managed to replicate it.

A cautionary tale about grand plans for leading to major innovation ecosystems. Some may recall the “Lisbon Strategy” announced in March 2000 by the leaders of the European Union.

The strategy’s goals were to: “Make the EU the world’s most competitive knowledge-based economy, achieve sustainable economic growth, create more and better jobs, and Increase social cohesion.” An overly ambitious agenda.

Overloaded Agenda

In November 2004, the former Dutch Prime Minister Win Kok produced an extremely negative interim report on the strategy’s implementation. Main findings: Most of the Lisbon Strategy’s goals were not achieved. The EU and its member states contributed to the slow progress by not acting with enough urgency. Pro innovation strategies were fragmented and weak. The report found “an overloaded agenda, poor coordination and conflicting priorities.”

Here we go. This highly publicized Grand Strategy, with the goal of relaunching the European Union as a world class innovation powerhouse, got almost nowhere.

Elsewhere, Israel gained the nickname of “Start-up Nation.” A small country, facing serious challenges, managed to nurture top talent that produces major innovations in pharmaceuticals, technology, software, and a great deal more. How do explain Israel’s success and the EU failure?

The future of European competitiveness

In 2024 Europe is at it again. The EU Commission asked former European Central Bank President Mario Draghi to produce another report. It just came out. It is called “The future of European competitiveness.” I am afraid that this will be another set of clever ideas that will not be implemented.

Innovation ecosystems need all the essential prerequisites listed earlier. But more than anything else it needs a special mindset. This is the “secret sauce” that cannot be willed into place by technocrats and bureaucrats.

Legal Disclaimer:

PressLink distributes this news content on an “as-is” basis, without any express or implied warranties of any kind. PressLink expressly disclaims all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented in this article. Any complaints, copyright issues, or concerns regarding this article should be directed to the author.

Note:

This content is not authored by, nor does it reflect the endorsement of, PressLink, its advertisers, or any affiliated entities. For inquiries or corrections related to press releases, please contact PressLink directly.

Presslink Media

3rd Global Forum for Political Consultants

Posted on by John

Washington, DC – Oct 18, 2024 On October 15th, the 3rd Global Forum for Political Consultants and Campaign Managers brought together industry leaders in Washington, D.C. The Forum was held at Bay Atlantic University, BAU, located in downtown Washington, next to the White House, in cooperation with the Global Policy Institute, a Washington think tank affiliated with BAU. Organized by the International Government Relations Professionals Association (IGAPA), SIC Group USA LLC, and the Institute for Democracy and Development “PolitA,” the event addressed major challenges in political campaigning, both nationally and globally.

Paolo von Schirach, President of the Global Policy Institute, delivered an insightful keynote on innovation in political campaigns. He discussed how technologies like artificial intelligence and machine learning are transforming the way consultants target and engage with voters. Von Schirach emphasized that AI allows campaigns to connect with voters on a deeper level, tailoring messages based on individual preferences. He also moderated discussions that examined the ethical implications of using these tools, cautioning that while they offer immense potential, they raise concerns about privacy and manipulation.

The timing of the forum, just three weeks before the U.S. presidential election, made it a critical platform for discussing pressing issues such as polarization, disinformation, and rising campaign costs. Speakers including Kateryna Odarchenko, Mark Mellman, and Fred Turner explored the strategies being employed by Democratic and Republican candidates, debating whether emotional appeals or economic messages will sway voters. Mellman observed that the outcome of the election could hinge on how well campaigns connect with voters’ emotions or deliver clear economic plans.

In addition to focusing on the U.S. election, the forum also explored international election trends. Von Schirach analyzed Italy’s 2022 parliamentary elections, highlighting the concerning trend of voter disengagement, with only 50% of eligible voters participating. This shift in voter behavior could have significant implications for democracies worldwide. Another session, led by Dr. Sean Michael Cox of Bay Atlantic University, addressed crisis management in political campaigns, offering strategies for countering disinformation and managing scandals effectively through social media.

The forum attracted participants from six countries. Distinguished guests such as Stephen Blank, Jason Shelton, and Rabbi Chaim Cohen contributed to the discussions, further enhancing the global perspective. The event underscored the evolving nature of political campaigning and the importance of staying ahead in the rapidly changing digital landscape.

SOURCE IGAPA

Legal Disclaimer:

PressLink distributes this news content on an “as-is” basis, without any express or implied warranties of any kind. PressLink expressly disclaims all responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information presented in this article. Any complaints, copyright issues, or concerns regarding this article should be directed to the author.

Note:

This content is not authored by, nor does it reflect the endorsement of, PressLink, its advertisers, or any affiliated entities. For inquiries or corrections related to press releases, please contact PressLink directly.