Equipped

WASHINGTON — Bobby Ray Inman’s bizarre withdrawal as the defense secretary nominee provides a glimpse into a peculiar Washington phenomenon–the insider who has spent so long behind the scenes that he is unprepared for the glare of the public limelight.

For more than 20 years, first as a Navy admiral and later as director of the National Security Agency and then deputy CIA director, Inman was part of a cadre of people who exercise great power in government but are insulated from the give-and-take of daily political life.

Inman’s remarks in announcing his withdrawal Tuesday and interviews with some of his friends suggest that the retired admiral was unequipped to step into the public arena. Despite his stated reasons, that lack of exposure to public life has emerged as the most plausible explanation for Inman’s abrupt turnabout.

“We thought: ‘He’s an insider–he probably knows the rules of the game.’ But he didn’t,” said Stephen H. Hess, a Brookings Institution political analyst. “We were all caught off guard by that.”

William Safire, the New York Times columnist accused by Inman of mounting unfair attacks, said Wednesday that he suspects Inman withdrew because he and other journalists were working on stories that might have damaged Inman’s chances for winning confirmation.

In his column appearing today, Safire wrote that Inman might have been worried by probes into reports that Inman had used a source on the Senate Intelligence Committee staff to help “manipulate” unsuspecting senators during Inman’s time at the CIA.

Inman had blamed a “new McCarthyism” in the press and the threat of a “partisan attack” by Republicans for his decision, but the media coverage and the GOP were overwhelmingly favorable toward him.

There were other ingredients as well: By Inman’s own admission, he did not thirst for the post. “I did not want a job in Washington,” he said in an interview.

He said he accepted Clinton’s offer because, as a career military officer, he found it difficult to refuse a presidential request.

Friends suggest that Inman’s longtime insecurities, apparently stemming from his days as a clumsy, bespectacled youngster, may have played a part by prompting him to overreact to fears that his reputation was being besmirched.

Inman’s experience is not unique in Washington politics. Others who have made the transition–notably Dwight D. Eisenhower, who went from five-star general to President, have had similar adjustments to make, although Eisenhower managed it more deftly.

Being an admiral or general provides a degree of insulation that often is a handicap for a would-be politician. Few are willing to criticize a senior military officer, especially in public.

And someone who has spent the bulk of his career as an intelligence officer is even more protected. By nature, the chiefs of the nation’s intelligence agencies stay in the background, even while advising presidents, briefing congressional leaders and influencing policies.

Especially during the Cold War, the bulk of their contact with the outside was behind closed doors–with lawmakers or reporters respectfully grateful for any morsel of information they were given.

Inman’s circumstances, and his own talents, accustomed him to receiving nothing but plaudits. Presidents, lawmakers and even the press praised him lavishly, extolling his brilliance and wisdom. Hardly an unkind word was to be found.

What Inman actually had to face during his few short weeks as defense secretary-designate was mild:

* A potential flap over his failure to pay Social Security taxes for a housekeeper peaked a few hours after it was announced, leaked by the White House to head off any serious brouhaha. The issue had been a major element in toppling two candidates for top Justice Department posts.

* News stories, backed up by bankruptcy records, noted his mixed performance in various business ventures. The articles were brought on mainly by Inman’s statements that he planned to bring more business techniques to government.

As Inman eventually admitted, the only real criticism came from a handful of columnists. News coverage and most editorials were heavy with praise; Inman said Tuesday that the working press had treated him fairly.

Inman did “more to besmirch his own reputation in his press conference than the press or the Republicans ever did,” Hess said. “Most people think his response bordered on the bizarre.”

Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.), whom Inman accused–apparently without foundation–of spearheading a GOP attack against him, offered perhaps the unkindest cut of all:

“I think it’s probably a break for President Clinton that he didn’t get the job, the way he carried on yesterday,” the senator said Wednesday on CBS-TV’s “This Morning” program, in a view shared by some White House aides.

Times staff writer James Risen contributed to this story.

Nine American destroyers stand at the vanguard of the U.S. Navy’s efforts to integrate laser weapons into the battlefield of the future. Lasers and other directed energy (DE) weapon systems went from an elusive dream to reality over the past decade, which TWZ has covered extensively. We’ve now compiled the most complete public accounting of the warships equipped with operational systems today, where they’re deployed, and what they can do.

The U.S. military is moving aggressively to reduce reliance on expensive single-use munitions, and laser weapons are oft-touted as part of a long-term solution. The recently released FY2027 budget reflects the urgency, with billions appropriated for scaled directed energy research and development (R&D) programs. “DE capabilities offer an inexpensive cost-per-shot alternative to conventional systems, increased magazine depth, and enhanced defense-in-depth,” budget documents state. The volume of high-end munitions expended during Operation Epic Fury, previous engagements with Iran, and the fight in and around the Red Sea against the Houthis, not to mention the near half-decade-long war in Ukraine, has sparked debate around the status and depth of U.S. stockpiles, driving renewed interest and investment in low-cost, reusable alternatives.

Countering swarms of cheap Iranian drones and missiles during extended combat operations presents a new challenge for America’s Arleigh Burke class destroyers, which are limited by how many missiles can be packed into 90 or 96 vertical launch system (VLS) cells and can only be reloaded at friendly ports with proper gear. Lasers, in contrast, do not face the same constraints, although the services have faced significant hurdles in fielding operational systems in the past.

The Navy has armed nine guided-missile destroyers with shipboard solid state lasers (SSLs) for self-defense since we reported on the first in November 2019. “The Navy has placed directed energy systems on nine ships and is working to expand testing and employment in the fleet,” a U.S. Navy official confirmed to TWZ. However, the official declined to discuss current operations when asked if the systems were employed against Iranian forces in the Middle East.

While the U.S. has several SSL programs in various stages of testing and development, two primary systems are operational on warships today: the Optical Dazzling Interdictor, Navy (ODIN), and the High Energy Laser with Integrated Optical-dazzler and Surveillance (HELIOS). TWZ has covered both systems in detail before, which you can read about here and here.

ODIN, the first SSL scaled across multiple destroyers, features a low-powered laser designed to work as a “dazzler” to blind or confuse the electro-optical and/or imaging infrared seekers on incoming weapons, such as one-way attack drones, throwing them off course. The system can also neutralize cameras and sensors used for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) deployed aboard enemy ships, submarine masts, crewed aircraft, and drones. Initially, ODIN was installed on eight ships, but one unit was transferred for training to Naval Surface Warfare Center Port Hueneme from USS Kidd (DDG-100), which is completing a two-year maintenance availability in Everett, WA.

Two ODIN-enabled destroyers are on combat deployments in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility (AOR). USS Spruance (DDG-111), part of the five-ship Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group and the independently deployed USS John Finn (DDG-113) are operating in the Indian Ocean supporting ongoing operations against Iran. USS Gridley (DDG-101), the only other ODIN-equipped DDG underway, is in the South Atlantic Ocean escorting aircraft carrier USS Nimitz (CVN-68) to her new homeport at Norfolk. The four other destroyers are at their respective homeports in San Diego and Yokosuka, as depicted in the graphic at the top of this post.

The far more powerful but less numerous HELIOS system, integrated solely on USS Preble (DDG-88), is a 60-kilowatt (kW) class laser weapon capable of knocking down smaller unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and burning holes in fast inshore attack craft (FIAC), as well as functioning as a dazzler like ODIN. The system, which also carries the designation Mk 5 Mod 0, provides a low cost-per-shot capability to address anti-surface warfare and counter-ISR threats, while fully integrating with the Aegis Combat System. Lockheed Martin has previously discussed scaling the power rating up to 150kW.

Preble, the only destroyer currently equipped with HELIOS, is forward-deployed and at homeport in Yokosuka, Japan. During a demonstration last year, Preble successfully disabled four incoming drones. Funding for additional tests and maintenance was included in the FY2027 budget.

The Navy has also installed other experimental high-energy laser directed energy weapons on ships in the past, such as the Laser Weapon System Demonstrator tested aboard USS Portland, and test-fired a LOCUST laser from an aircraft carrier for the first time last year. The latest budget request supports R&D for several programs, including a containerized 150kW Joint Laser Weapon System (JLWS) for cruise missile defense, the Joint Beam Control System (JBCS) technology to develop a 300-500kW laser, and upgrades for the High Energy Laser Counter Anti-Ship Cruise Missile Project (HELCAP).

Regardless, while laser weapons are very attractive for all the reasons listed earlier in this article, their application remains limited by various factors. Laser weapons capable of downing drones and disabling small boats have a range measured in single miles, at best, so they are only capable of providing close-in defense. This is further impacted, and heavily so, by atmospheric conditions. They also need to have their beam dwell on the target for extended periods of time in order to burn a hole in it. As a result, their ability to rapidly engage targets, and especially at range in all weather conditions, is very limited. Thermal and power supply restrictions also impact their ability to make rapid follow-up shots. Finally, lasers remain finicky pieces of technology and are full of delicate components, which has impacted reliability in the field.

Still, even with all these limitations, these systems are improving and their range, reliability, and power will increase over time. As a result, they will only become a more important part of naval warfare in the coming years, with hopes that their ability to rapidly down faster-flying missiles isn’t too far over the horizon.

Contact the author: ian.ellis-jones@teamrecurrent.io