Zelensky wants to sanction Iran ‘for 50 years’

The Cradle | May 29, 2023
President Volodymyr Zelensky drafted and submitted a law to Ukraine’s parliament calling for the imposition of sanctions against Iran for a period of 50 years, Ukrainian state-media reported on 28 May.
“The document has already been submitted for consideration by the parliament’s leadership and the Committee on National Security, Defense and Intelligence,” state-media outlet Ukrinform said on Monday.
The draft was initially put forward on Saturday, 27 May.
“To approve the decision of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine dated May 27, 2023 ‘On the application of sectoral special economic and other restrictive measures (sanctions) to the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ put into effect by Presidential Decree No. 308/2023 dated May 27, 2023,” Ukrinform cites the draft as reading.
“The sanctions are to be imposed for 50 years,” it adds.
According to Kiev, the early hours of Sunday saw a massive Russian attack against Ukrainian forces, which involved the use of over 50 Iranian Shahed drones.
The Ukrainians claimed to have shot most of them down.
“This was the largest-ever drone attack on the capital since the beginning of the full-scale invasion, particularly using Shahed loitering munitions,” Ukrainian media cited a military official as saying.
Ukraine has consistently condemned Iran for its alliance with Russia, accusing Tehran of supplying military assistance, namely its Shahed 136 drones, to Russian forces fighting the Ukrainian army.
The Islamic Republic has denied supplying any drones to Russia during the conflict, admitting only to deliveries made before the war in Ukraine.
In November last year, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian revealed that Tehran and Kiev had agreed to hold a meeting to discuss the drone issue diplomatically but that the US and its allies sabotaged the meeting.
The US pressured Ukraine to cancel the talks because of its wish to take advantage of the Iranian drone issue and use it as part of its policy against the Islamic Republic, Abdollahian claimed at the time.
Iran has repeatedly asserted its neutrality in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and has, on many occasions, offered to mediate between the two sides.
Iran to unveil hypersonic missile ‘soon’: IRGC commander
Press TV – May 29, 2023
Iran’s Mersad air defense system fires a missile during the final stage of a massive maneuver, codenamed ‘Guardians of Velayat Sky-98,’ in the central province of Semnan.
A top commander of Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) says the country will unveil a homegrown hypersonic ballistic missile in the near future.
“The hypersonic missile has passed its tests and will be unveiled soon,” Brigadier General Amir-Ali Hajizadeh, the commander of the IRGC’s Aerospace Division, said on Monday.
He added that the new missile is capable of bypassing all air defense missile systems and targeting the enemy’s anti-missile systems.
The IRGC commander described the development of the missile as a “great leap in the field of missiles.”
“The hypersonic missile has a high speed (around 12-13 Mach) and can maneuver both in and out of the Earth’s atmosphere,” Hajizadeh said.
Hypersonic missiles can fly at speeds at least five times faster than the speed of sound, making them virtually impossible to intercept.
Back in November, Hajizadeh for the first time announced that Iran had developed a homegrown hypersonic ballistic missile capable of penetrating advanced aerial defense shields and striking designated targets.
Iran on Tuesday successfully test-launched its most advanced Khorramshahr-class ballistic missile, called Kheibar, a medium-range precision-guided missile that can carry a 1,500 kg warhead.
Kheibar is a liquid-fueled missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers and a warhead weighing 1,500 kilograms, designed by the Ministry of Defense’s Aerospace Industries Organization.
Despite being under sanctions for decades, Iran has become self-sufficient in designing and manufacturing different types of military equipment, including missiles.
What Are Anti-Drone Systems and How Do They Work?
By Ilya Tsukanov – Sputnik – 29.05.2023
The NATO-Russia proxy conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated the significance of drones in modern warfare, with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) used by both sides for reconnaissance, targeting, and kamikaze attacks. What are the four main kinds of anti-drone defenses? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? Sputnik explores.
“The wars of the future will not be fought on a battlefield or at sea. They will be fought in space, or possibly on top of a very tall mountain. In either case, most of the actual fighting will be done by small robots and as you go forth today remember always – your duty is clear: to build and maintain those robots.”
That was the humorous but eerie prediction by the military school commandant in the 1997 The Simpsons episode “The Secret War of Lisa Simpson.” A quarter of a century later, the idea of using drones in warfare has become ubiquitous, and The Simpsons’ comedic flourish has been forever tainted by real-life conflict.
Although small propeller and rocket-propelled reconnaissance drones fitted with film cameras have been around since the Cold War, modern drone warfare, including camera-mounted, remote-operated GPS-equipped spy and strike drones, is a product of the early 21st century, with the United States kicking off the world’s first campaign of targeted killings using UAVs in 2002.
As small, inexpensive, off-the-shelf drones began entering the commercial market in the 2010s, they started to be used by non-state actors to attack armies and governments – with US-backed terrorists using them in the Syrian dirty war against Syrian and Russian forces, and Yemen’s Houthi militants deploying them against the Saudi-led coalition.
Large, military-grade drones were used to effect in the 2020 war between Azerbaijan and Armenian volunteers in Nagorno-Karabakh, and, starting in 2022, have been deployed extensively by NATO-backed Ukrainian forces in Donbass and throughout Ukraine against Russian forces. Russia has countered them using a series of domestically-developed drone defense systems. But more on that below.
Drone Defenses: What Types Are There?
In the second half of the 20th century, the USSR and the USA focused their air and missile defense research on targeting big, expensive manned fighters, bombers, transport planes, and ballistic and cruise missiles. Although this included research into fantastical concepts including the use of powerful lasers in space under Ronald Reagan’s Star Wars missile defense program, its main focus remained missiles – rocket-powered projectiles designed to intercept and destroy enemy aircraft and missiles.
Can Missiles Be Used to Down Drones?
For drones that are large enough – including unmanned combat aerial vehicles (UCAV) like the Bayraktar TB2, the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper, or the Northrop Grumman RQ-4A Global Hawk, which have wingspans of 12, 20, or even 40 meters, respectively, the most effective defenses are still good old-fashioned missiles designed to target jet aircraft.
Last month, Russian Air Defense Force Commander Andrey Demin reported that over 100 Bayraktar drones had been destroyed in fighting in Ukraine.
“There are practically no fundamental distinctions between fighting against strategic drones like the US Global Hawk (RQ-4) or Reaper (MQ-9) or Turkiye’s operational-tactical Bayraktar-TB and counteraction to crewed aircraft. The elimination of more than 100 Bayraktars, delivered to Ukraine throughout the period of the special military operation, is clear evidence of this,” Demin said, speaking with Russia’s official army newspaper Krasnaya Zvezda.
For the battle against large drones, including their detection and destruction, the same monitoring and strike systems as those used against traditional aircraft can be used. This has been demonstrated not only in Ukraine, but with the June 2019 shootdown over Iranian airspace in the Strait of Hormuz of a $220 million Global Hawk operated by the US Navy by an Iranian road-mobile air defense system known as the 3rd Khordad.
How Can Electronic Countermeasures Be Used to Destroy Drones?
Smaller drones, including so-called mini and micro UAVs, are more difficult to detect, Demin admitted, pointing to these weapons’ “small effective reflective surface” for radar detection, and saying that tracking such systems and revealing their trajectory using standard radar equipment is “rather problematic.”
For this purpose, the Russian military has developed an air defense system of a different sort – the RLK-MTs Valdai, a special-purpose radar designed specifically to detect, suppress, and neutralize small drones with extremely low radar cross sections.
Developed by Almaz-Antey, manufacturer of the Buk and S-300/S-400/S-500 series of air and missile defense systems, the RLK-MTs is a vehicle-mounted radar complex designed to detect enemy drones at distances of up to 15 km, and to take them down using electronic countermeasures (using a control and navigation signal suppression module) at close-in ranges of 2 km or less. The complex’s detection systems include an X-band radar module, thermal imagers and cameras, a radio signal source-finder module. The vehicles can be operated remotely.
Demin confirmed that the RLK-MTs is “already performing combat missions to cover critical military and state facilities, including those in the special military operation zone,” and said he expects production of the systems to ramp up dramatically in the coming years.
Large, vehicle-based systems stuffed with detection systems and powerful electronic countermeasures are arguably the most capable defenses against small drones, but certainly aren’t the only ones. Smaller systems, ranging from commercial and industrial anti-drone monitoring and suppression hardware, to military-grade man-portable anti-drone rifles have been created by several Russian manufacturers. These weapons include the PARS-S Stepashka – a 9.6 kg anti-drone gun with the capability to hijack enemy drones and force them to land or return to their launch sites. The system is effective at ranges between 500 meters and 1.5 km.
Other, similar portable anti-drone systems have been spotted in footage from the battlefield, including the Stupor electromagnetic rifle – which uses electromagnetic pulses to suppress drones’ control channels and force them down.
How Can Lasers Fight Drones?
Advances in laser pulse weaponry have enhanced prospects for their use in modern warfare. Last year, Yuri Borisov – the former Russian deputy prime minister responsible for defense and the space industry since appointed boss of Roscosmos, revealed that the Russian military has tested a mystery combat laser system known as the Zadira that’s capable of incinerating drones in seconds at distances of up to 5 km in Ukraine. Its development began in 2016 under the auspices of the Russian Federal Nuclear Center, a subsidiary of Rosatom.
The Zadira is not to be confused with the Peresvet – a strategic laser weapon designed to target an enemy up to 1,500 km in orbit over the planet. That system entered combat duty on a test basis in December 2018, but has not been used in Ukraine.
Russia is not the only country tinkering with the use of laser weapons for anti-drone warfare, with the United States and Israel also working on such weapons.
Lasers have several clear advantages over conventional air defense missiles – including their low cost (Israeli officials have boasted, for example, that the new Iron Beam laser-based air defense system uses just $2-worth of electricity – 10,000-50,000 times less than conventional Iron Dome missiles). But lasers also have a number of drawbacks, including the need to secure large amounts of electricity (limiting their mobility), plus problems operating in certain weather conditions, including fog and cloud cover).
Can Drones Be Used to Counter Other Drones?
Last but not least in the list of portable anti-drone defenses are other UAVs. Systems like the ZALA Lancet multipurpose loitering munition/kamikaze drone are capable of targeting enemy UAVs, with its developers creating a concept which they’ve dubbed “air mining” involving the deployment of large numbers of Lancets in an area of the front to protect against incursions by heavy attack drones. As an enemy drones approach, the Lancet locks on to the enemy target and dives onto it at high speeds to force it from the skies.
How Successful Has Russia’s Anti-Drone War Been?
Since Russia entered the Ukraine crisis, it has made many of the difficult but necessary changes to supply the Army with the equipment it needs for effective drone warfare.
Last week, an unclassified intelligence assessment by Britain’s Ministry of Defense concluded that Russia’s military had successfully integrated drone reconnaissance into operations involving long-range missile strikes in the Ukrainian hinterland. Also last week, a separate report by Britain’s Royal United Services Institute calculated that Russia has been using electronic warfare capabilities to destroy upwards of 10,000 Ukrainian drones per month. According to the assessment, Russia maintains “a major electronic warfare system roughly every 6 miles (9.6 km)” along the entire 1,200 km front line.
These assessments echo complaints by an insider at Ukraine’s Defense Ministry, who told one Western outlet in March that Russian forces had obtained “black magic” capabilities against Ukraine’s vast arsenal of NATO-supplied drones, including the ability to “jam frequencies, spoof GPS, [and] send a drone to the wrong altitude so that it simply drops out of the sky.”
Ukraine’s prized drone fleet almost grounded
RT | May 29, 2023
Turkish Bayraktar UAVs were touted as wonder weapons, with officials in Kiev saying they would give them an advantage against Russia. One year later, however, only a few remaining units are being used far from the battlefield, and for reconnaissance rather than attack missions, a Pentagon-linked analyst has told Business Insider.
Ukraine purchased dozens of Bayraktar TB2 drones and used them to strike Donbass in violation of a ceasefire agreement at least once, even before the conflict with Russia began last February. Kiev also claims to have received an unspecified number of additional drones during the past year, despite Türkiye’s official neutrality.
In the first months of the conflict, Kiev routinely claimed to have conducted successful strikes using TB2s, but by July, the Bayraktars became “almost useless,” and Kiev reserved them for “rare special operations,” Ukrainian pilots told Foreign Policy at the time.
Russian forces destroyed “more than 100 Bayraktar drones” in Ukraine, the deputy commander-in-chief of the Air Force, Lieutenant-General Andrey Demin, claimed in April.
As of now, the Ukrainian fleet of “once-prized drones have almost entirely been shot down,” Business Insider wrote on Sunday, citing an expert in unmanned and robotic military systems at the Center for Naval Analyses, Samuel Bendett.
“As a relatively slow and low-flying UAV, it can become a target for a range of air defense systems that are well organized,” Bendett said, adding that “once the Russian military got its act together, it was able to down many TB2s.”
The Bayraktar TB2 is a design of Turkish company Baykar Makina, which costs around $2 million per unit. Ankara has touted the drones since 2020, when they were said to have helped Azerbaijan prevail in the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. Turkish troops have also deployed them in Syria and Libya.
Responding to a prank caller last year, the head of the Association of Defense Enterprises of Ukraine admitted there was “more PR and corruption in Bayraktar than combat use,” and claimed “they were all shot down within a week.”
Earlier this month, a Bayraktar TB2 was destroyed after it reportedly went rogue over the Ukrainian capital, with a video showing the drone being taken down by a shoulder-fired rocket.
While pro-Ukrainian ‘open source intel’ accounts initially claimed it was a Russian Corsair, the Ukrainian military later admitted that they had to destroy their own drone after the operators failed to regain control.
Post-Bakhmut scenario in Ukraine war
BY M. K. BHADRAKUMAR | INDIAN PUNCHLINE | MAY 28, 2023
Ukraine President Zelensky and US President Biden met on the sideline of the G7 Summit at Hiroshima within hours of the statement from the Kremlin at 1 am last Sunday, transmitting President Vladimir Putin’s greetings to the Russian forces for the “completion of the operation to liberate Artemovsk” (known as Bakhmut in Ukraine.)
The operation lasted 224 days and turned into an epic battle. Ukraine paid a heavy price in blood in trying to hold onto Bakhmut, which came to be called a “Meat Grinder”. American analysts have listed twenty five Ukrainian brigades and at least 9 battalions and 5 regiments — an estimated deployment 120,000 troops at the very least — thrown into the battle by Kiev. An estimated 70% casualties would mean that Ukraine suffered as many as 94,150 killed and wounded. It is a devastating defeat.
Conventional military doctrine says that an army attacking an entrenched force will need at least three times more soldiers than the defending force entrenched in fortifications. But Wagner fighters numbering 32,000 fighters faced off with a NATO proxy force almost 4 times bigger in numbers and equipped with modern weaponry.
The shock over the crushing defeat was writ large on the faces of US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky as they faced the media at Hiroshima a few hours after the Kremlin statement appeared. Reading from a prepared text, Biden announced, in a major reversal of policy, that the US would be “launching some new joint efforts with our partners to train Ukrainian pilots on a fourth-generation fighter aircraft like the F-16.”
Meanwhile, in a series of showy incidents, Ukraine began hitting targets in Russia with US and British supplied weapons. There have been sporadic artillery and Himars missile attacks on Russian civilians in border towns; two drone attacks on the Kremlin; and British Storm Shadow cruise missile strikes on targets in Russia. In one particular instance last week, there has been a cross border incursion in the Belgorod region with US supplied vehicles and weapons. But none of these attacks can be deemed as “game changers.”
While the US and the rest of NATO are feigning ignorance about these attacks, the key fact is that Ukraine gets targeting data that only NATO intelligence sources could provide. Thus, the decades-old red line dating back to Cold War has been breached — namely, that neither the US nor Russia would attack the other side’s territory directly or indirectly. (They held the guardrails even during the Afghan jihad in the 1980s.)
There are going to be consequences. The first sign of it came with the news that nuclear weapons are already being deployed in Belarus and Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu was in Minsk to sign the necessary agreement detailing the logistics of deployment. Biden told reporters on Friday after returning from Japan that his reaction to the Russian deployment is “extremely negative.”
But in reality, Moscow’s intention is to provide Belarus with deterrent capability against any rash moved by NATO such as cutting off access to Kaliningrad. Incidentally, the US too has been keeping nuclear weapons on European soil for many years.
But a flashpoint can always arise. The upcoming NATO exercise codenamed Air Defender 23 (June 12-23) will be the most significant military exercise ever carried out over the European skies and the most extensive deployment exercise of air forces in the history of the western alliance — involving 25 NATO countries, 10,000 military personnel and approximately 220 aircraft.
According to Larry Johnson, well-known American blogger and former analyst at the CIA, “a training operation of this size and scale against the backdrop of heightened tensions in the region is akin to lighting a match in a gasoline storage tank.” That said, at the tactical level, the Russian military is also positioning itself for further operations to complete the liberation of Donbass, after having gained control of Bakhmut, which is a major communication hub through which all Ukrainian logistics passed along the Donetsk arc up to Seversk.
A report in Izvestia on Wednesday said, quoting expert opinion, that Avdiivka and Maryinka are “next in line… so that there will be no shelling of Donetsk city… Next, we will have to turn off the big Donetsk arc — from Ugledar to Seversk with access to Konstantinovka and Slavyansk. These are the last two cities of the large Donbass agglomeration, followed by the steppe (leading toward Dnieper River) where it will be very difficult for the enemy to hold on.”
Again, the Wagner fighters being replaced by regular Russian forces for further operations. Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in an interview on Russian TV on Friday: “It’s hard to say where the breaking point is… Obviously, the degree of direct and indirect involvement in this conflict by the countries of the collective West is surging day by day. This may protract the conflict, but will not turn the tide drastically. It cannot turn the tide at all. Russia will press on with the operation, and Russia will ensure its interests one way or another and achieve the designated objectives.”
Meanwhile, Russia has been conducting an intensive bombing campaign to make it difficult for Kiev to assemble the manpower and firepower required to launch and sustain an offensive operation beyond a few days, and is intensifying its operations overall to decimate Ukraine’s military capabilities.
The “known unknown” is how the 2024 US election campaign will affect the trajectory of the war. Biden’s shift on F-16s can be seen as a knee-jerk reaction. Even Gen. Mark Milley, chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff admits that F-16 isn’t a “magic weapon.”
Meanwhile, Russia continues to probe the US intentions. In an interview with the prestigious International Affairs magazine, Russian Deputy Defence Minister Sergey Ryabkov said on Friday that “The US ruling elite has consolidated itself to a great extent on an anti-Russian basis, regardless of party affiliation. In my opinion, the situation is turning into a force majeure.”
However, Ryabkov who is the highest ranking “point person” for relations with the US at the foreign ministry also added, “No matter how things turn out, we are willing to maintain dialogue with whoever comes to power (in the US), stays in power.”
Therefore, Ukraine relinquishing the accession to NATO and the EU and returning to neutral non-aligned status will remain one of the key conditions of a successful peace process in Ukraine. The big question is how far the NATO will go at its forthcoming summit in July in Vilnius; would this mean Ukraine’s full membership or something else? The likelihood of any big decisions in Vilnius doesn’t seem to be in the cards.
Interestingly, the Kremlin instinctively warmed up to the idea of a phone call to Putin “in due course,” voiced by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz after his return to Berlin from the G7 summit in Hiroshima. Berlin has consistently disfavoured any precipitate move by NATO apropos Ukraine’s membership.
In an interview with Wall Street Journal on Friday celebrating his centennial, Henry Kissinger also remarked that “the offer to put Ukraine into NATO was a grave mistake and led to this war.” Kissinger advocated instead greater clarity in Russia’s stance on Europe, flagging that while Russia is interested in fostering ties with Europe for its own development, it is also cautious of potential threats coming from the West.
Canada’s ‘shocking’ new report on foreign interference has found none
By Rachel Marsden | RT | May 27, 2023
The special rapporteur tasked by the Trudeau government with looking into foreign interference in Canadian politics didn’t find much. But he said he’ll nonetheless hold a “series of public hearings with Canadians” to talk about the “problem of foreign interference,” which he couldn’t really qualify with much actual evidence.
Former Canadian governor general David Johnston took all of two months to come up with his report, sparked by allegations that China had meddled in recent Canadian federal elections. The hysteria had reached such fever pitch that Ottawa expelled Chinese diplomat Zhao Wei after allegations arose in the Canadian press that China had threatened the Hong Kong-based family of Canadian member of parliament, Michael Chong. But after talking to Canadian spy services, Johnston said he found “no intelligence indicating that the PRC took steps to threaten his family.”
He did find evidence that Chinese officials had “sought to build profiles” on this MP and others. Oh wow, stop the press! Because some people might be shocked to learn that the actual job of diplomats serving in foreign countries is to liaise with local officials to advocate in favor of cooperation that’s self-serving to at least some degree, although ideally mutually beneficial as well. And to do that, you probably want to make sure that you know something about the guy to at least the same degree that a used car salesman would make an effort to know what would interest or appeal to a specific customer – if only because national interests should ideally be worth as much as a Twingo.
Your neighbor compiling a dossier on you is creepy. A diplomat compiling a dossier on a government official he’s dealing with is just basic professionalism.
Johnston also found that there was no shady partisan favoritism of one party over any other by Chinese officials in Canada, contrary to reporting that suggested favoritism of Liberals over Conservatives. It’s not as though either of the establishment parties is friendly towards China. Johnson said Chinese officials were more interested in supporting pro-China candidates, but also had to point out to the pearl-clutchers that a foreign diplomat saying he or she favors a particular candidate in a foreign election isn’t actually foreign interference. After all, Western officials couldn’t shut up about how much they wanted former President Donald Trump to lose to whomever the Democrats put up against him in the last two US elections. So if that’s not foreign interference, then why should other countries be held to a different standard just because they aren’t in the same club?
There have been press allegations that China sought the electoral defeat of certain candidates, like former Conservative MP Kenny Chiu, who sponsored foreign agent registry legislation. However, Johnston found that, while “it is clear that PRC diplomats did not like Mr. Chiu, who is of Hong Kong descent and not from mainland China… it is much less clear that they did anything particular about it” beyond not inviting him to their sponsored events.
Despite the lack of qualified evidence of interference in the report, and the focus on a single country – China – Johnston nonetheless came to the conclusion that “there is no doubt that foreign governments are attempting to influence candidates and voters… This is a growing threat to our democratic system and must be resisted as effectively as possible by government.”
No need to dig further, Johnston figures, discounting a public inquiry in favor of “public hearings.” But doesn’t that risk just batting around all the various fallacies and misconceptions that have been put out there by the Western press and officials – like those that Johnston himself had to correct in his report? Without an objective and full inquiry, the opportunity to exploit hearings to promote propaganda seems substantial. What about Ukrainian influence on Canadian politicians? Or Israeli influence?
Johnston focuses exclusively on China, and takes the odd swipe at Russia, in passing, but never mentions the kind of foreign interference brought to light at the recent French National Assembly commission into the same subject.
“Foreign interference, yes, I encountered it. Most of the time, it came from a friendly and allied country called the United States. I was listened to with President Sarkozy for five years by the NSA,” said Sarkozy’s former prime minister Francois Fillon. He confirmed WikiLeaks disclosures from US intercepts published in 2015 indicating that the National Security Agency was conducting electronic surveillance of French officials from the American embassy in Paris. Or that it was listening in on conversations of German allies at the highest level, including those of then-Chancellor Angela Merkel.
“I was not directly affected by Russian interference,” Fillon clarified, noting that like all great powers, Russia tries to “assert its point of view,” but that didn’t happen with him personally when he was in office. So then why make such a big deal about it, unless it’s just for propaganda purposes?
Canada, like Europe, suffers from tunnel vision when it comes to protecting its own interests and independence. The proof lies in the fact that both have failed to diversify away from their chronic over-reliance on the US. While it makes sense that the country sharing the world’s longest land border with the US would go for the low-hanging fruit when it comes to trade, it would nonetheless be interesting to qualify the pressures on Canadian officials and critical interests that have resulted in the Canadian establishment marching in lockstep with Washington, repeating the same propaganda and naming the same foes.
The idea that the US – the most powerful country on Earth – has absolutely no influence on its resource-rich next-door neighbor is absurd. The fact that the influence is so systemic that it’s not even worth a glance or a mention in a report into foreign interference is glaring. Does the Canadian government care to look under that rock? Or are they just going to keep scapegoating Russia and China when the most existential, insidious threat to Canadian independence lies inward and southward?
Iran Unveils New Precision-Guided Kheibar Ballistic Missile
Al-Manar – May 25, 2023
Iran’s Ministry of Defense has unveiled the newest version of the domestically-manufactured Khorramshahr ballistic missile, a medium-range precision-guided projectile named Kheibar.
Kheibar (Khoramshahr 4) was unveiled Thursday morning in the presence of Defense Minister Brigadier General Mohammad Reza Ashtian during a ceremony marking the 41st anniversary of the liberation of the southwestern city of Khorramshahr.
The missile’s extended range, advanced guidance and control system, and improved structural features further solidify Iran’s status as a formidable missile power.
Kheibar is one of the most advanced missiles designed by the experts of the Ministry of Defense’s Aerospace Industries Organization.
It is a liquid-fueled missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers and a warhead weighing 1,500 kilograms with impressive strategic and tactical capabilities.
The Khorramshahr class of missiles is known for its unique guidance and control system during the mid-flight phase.
This feature allows the missile to control and adjust its trajectory outside the Earth’s atmosphere, and to deactivate its guidance system upon entering the atmosphere, giving it complete immunity against electronic warfare attacks.
Thanks to this advanced control system, Kheibar’s warhead does not require the typical thin-wing arrangement, which in turn allows the missile to pack up a heavier explosive load.
The Kheibar missile also boasts an incredibly short preparation and launch time.
The use of self-igniting (hypergolic) fuel and the absence of the need for fuel injection and horizontal alignment after the verticalization phase have cut Kheibar’s launch time to less than 12 minutes.
Thanks to its powerful engine, the Kheibar missile possesses an exceptional impact force, with a ground impact force of 280 and a vacuum impact force of 300 seconds.
The high speed at which the warhead makes impact with the designated target prevents enemy air defense systems from detecting, tracking, and taking action to shoot down the missile.
Additionally, the engine enables the missile to reach speeds of 16 Mach outside the atmosphere and 8 Mach within the atmosphere.
The unveiling of Kheibar marks a significant advancement in Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and demonstrates the country’s commitment to enhancing its defense and deterrent power.
Iranian officials have long asserted that the country’s military capabilities are entirely meant for defense, and that its missile program will never be up for negotiations.
Chinese War Simulation Finds Top US Carrier Group Could Be ‘Destroyed With Certainty’
By Wyatt Reed – Sputnik – 25.05.2023
War games conducted by Chinese researchers found the US military’s most prized aircraft carrier could be reliably sunk with relative ease in the event of a hot war in the South China Sea.
A volley of hypersonic missiles could reliably sink the US military’s most powerful aircraft carrier group in a potential conflict, according to war game simulations carried out by a team of Chinese military planners.
Using 24 of their most advanced anti-ship missiles, Chinese forces consistently destroyed a carrier fleet led by the USS Gerald R. Ford over the course of 20 mock battles in simulations which were run on a war game platform employed by the People’s Liberation Army.
In the simulation, the US ships came under fire after ignoring multiple Chinese warnings not to approach an island in the South China Sea controlled by Beijing.
For test purposes, the war games’ designers used a carrier group made up of six surface ships which were selected for their “unparalleled strength and advanced technology.”
A major Hong Kong-based newspaper reported that the military planners “selected vessels deemed the US Navy’s most superior – the CVN-78 Gerald R. Ford, accompanied by a CG56 Ticonderoga-class cruiser the San Jacinto, and four DDG-103 Arleigh Burke-class Flight IIA guided missile destroyers.”
Led by Cao Hongsong from the North University of China, the researchers found that virtually every US surface vessel was ravaged by the attack and eventually sank.
According to researchers, the Ford carrier group – which was once thought to be all but unsinkable – could actually be “destroyed with certainty” using just a handful of hypersonic missile strikes.
Chinese military planners placed a number of constraints on themselves in the simulation, including cutting their access to space-based spy satellites and limiting the number of hypersonic missiles available.
The basic principle underlying the exercise was to be “lenient with the enemy and strict with oneself,” Cao explained.
As the Hong Kong-based outlet explained, “during the simulation, the PLA used its sea-based surveillance network to detect and identify the US carrier group before firing eight of the less-reliable hypersonic missiles simultaneously from southern and central sites in China.”
Though “some of the missiles were intercepted, the attack depleted the US fleet’s SM-3 munitions, paving the way for the PLA to launch “eight of its more accurate hypersonic missiles from northern and western China, with four focused on the aircraft carrier while the others targeted the destroyers,” the outlet noted.
“After the attack, four ships survived from the blue [US] team, with the destroyers having the most remaining, on average.”
A “mop-up” operation with six of the less accurate hypersonic missiles was able to dispatch with the remaining vessels, the research paper determined.
After the simulation was run 20 times to allow for different variables which could affect the outcome of the engagement, the team’s strategy was ultimately able to eliminate an average of 5.6 out of 6 surface vessels – effectively meaning the “total destruction” of the carrier group.
The release of a paper detailing the war game in May marked “the first time the results of simulated hypersonic strikes against a US carrier group have been made public” by China’s military, the Honk Kong outlet noted.
But it’s likely to be seen as a warning to Washington against any provocations in the South China Sea.
An anonymous Beijing-based researcher interviewed by the outlet suggested that “greater transparency about China’s military capabilities and intentions could help to reduce misunderstandings and miscalculations on both sides, which could in turn help to reduce the risk of conflict.”
The Devil’s In The Details When It Comes To Pashinyan’s Karabakh Peace Proposal
BY ANDREW KORYBKO | MAY 23, 2023
Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan proposed recognizing Azerbaijan’s territorial integrity in full in exchange for it doing the same to his country, though the caveat is that he’ll only do so if the security of local Armenians there is guaranteed. This naturally raises the question of how to satisfy his requirement in a way that’s also acceptable to Azerbaijan, with one possibility being to prolong the deployment of Russia’s peacekeepers there.
It can’t be taken for granted that Azerbaijan would approve of this for the extended period of time that Pashinyan appears to be implying is required to guarantee their safety, however, since it appears to be growing frustrated with the status quo. Azerbaijan only agreed to the presence of these forces in November 2020 because it expected that they’d expedite the removal of Armenian forces in parallel with facilitating the reasserting of the state’s sovereignty over the rest of its territory.
That outcome hasn’t yet materialized, and instead, these South Caucasus rivals have even clashed several times along their internationally recognized border. Armenia also accuses Azerbaijan of violating the same Moscow-mediated ceasefire that it agreed to after self-described “activists” blocked the Lachin Corridor, while Azerbaijan accuses Armenia of doing the same by still launching attacks from Karabakh. These factors have combined to make many worry about whether another war might soon erupt.
As a self-respecting state, Azerbaijan regards it as offensive for Armenia to hint that it can’t guarantee the security of its citizens, which includes those Armenians who’ve been in Karabakh since Soviet times but not those who moved to the region as colonists after its occupation by neighboring Armenia. Its rising confidence and regional prestige as a result of its victory two and a half years ago reduces the chances that Azerbaijan would agree to prolong the deployment of Russia’s peacekeepers.
Those calculations indirectly pose a problem for Russian-Armenian relations since Moscow must prove its military-security worth to Yerevan in order to prevent its “defection” from the CSTO, with the scenario of it prolonging the deployment of its peacekeepers in Azerbaijan being the best way to do so. Armenia surprised Russia by participating in joint NATO drills last month, which was followed by its Deputy Foreign Minister revealing this month that it contemplated leaving the CSTO last September.
Pashinyan added earlier this week that Armenia’s withdrawal might indeed still happen if it concludes that the CSTO has “become a non-functional organization”, which prompted Kremlin spokesman Peskov to promise that Russia will retain relevant dialogue with its partner in an effort to prevent this. The unstated threat that was just conveyed by Yerevan is that it’ll ditch the CSTO and thus deal a major blow to Moscow if Russia can’t convince Azerbaijan to guarantee the security of Armenians there.
In the event that Armenia “defects” from this Russian-led military-security bloc, then it would immediately raise questions about Moscow’s reliability to its other partners such as those in Central Asia, thus possibly emboldening those countries to distance themselves from it too like the West wants. With Armenia out of the CSTO, it might then apply for expedited entry into NATO, which could possibly lead to it and Georgia joining together like was supposed to be the case with Finland and Sweden.
Russia must therefore do its utmost to avert this dark scenario from unfolding, to which end it’s pressed to politically resolve the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict once and for all as soon as possible before Yerevan’s patience runs out. That said, it wouldn’t be in Armenia’s best interests to ditch the CSTO until it gets what it wants since otherwise it’ll be without Russia’s protection if Azerbaijan and/or Turkiye decide to invade its internationally recognized territory in order to resolve this conflict on their own terms.
Nevertheless, it might end up being the case that Armenia could secretly reach an agreement with the US for the latter to extend security assurances to it prior to that country’s membership in NATO upon it formally announcing its withdrawal from the CSTO and intention to join that enemy bloc. The precedent for doing so was already established last May after the US gave exactly these sort of assurances to Finland and Sweden until they joined NATO, which is still relevant to the latter since it hasn’t yet done so.
Russia’s challenge is therefore threefold since it must: 1) broker a sustainable peace deal between Armenia and Azerbaijan as soon as possible to preempt Yerevan’s “defection” from the CSTO on the pretext that this group is “non-functional”; 2) to which end Moscow must likely get Baku to agree to at least prolong the presence of Russian peacekeepers for the next few years; and 3) then ensure that Armenia still doesn’t “defect” from that bloc after it already gets what it wants from Russia.
Each of these tasks presents a formidable challenge in and of themselves, let alone having to be tackled all at once due to Armenia hinting that it’ll dump the CSTO if it doesn’t get what it wants sometime soon, and not to mention that this is happening amidst Russia’s ongoing special operation. Even so, if there’s any country whose diplomats are capable of rising to the occasion, it’s Russia’s. This doesn’t mean that they’ll succeed, but just that nobody should doubt that they’ll give this their best shot.
Russian vessel attacked by Ukrainian sea drones off Bosporus – MOD
RT | May 24, 2023
The Russian Navy’s reconnaissance ship, ‘Ivan Churs’, has been attacked by three unmanned speed boats launched by the Ukrainian military, the Russian Defense Ministry said on Wednesday.
The vessel was targeted early in the morning by the drones in Türkiye’s exclusive economic zone, some 140km (86 miles) to the northeast of the Bosporus Strait, the ministry’s spokesman, Lieutenant General Igor Konashenkov, said during a daily briefing.
The ship was patrolling areas near the TurkStream and Blue Stream natural gas pipelines, Konashenkov noted, adding that the naval patrols were deployed after the attack on the Nord Stream pipelines last September.
“All of the enemy boats were destroyed by fire with the onboard weapons of the Russian ship,” the spokesman added.
The military shared footage of the incident, showing a small, black speedboat coming under large-caliber gunfire. The vessel suffers a direct hit and explodes, leaving a plume of black smoke on the water.
Orban: Relations With Sweden ‘Awfully Wrong’, Preclude It From Joining NATO
By Igor Kuznetsov – Sputnik – 24.05.2023
According to various reports, faced with resistance from Turkiye and Hungary alike, the Swedish government has considered postponing the goal of entering NATO from the July summit in Vilnius to the bloc’s meeting in Washington next April.
Relations between Hungary and Sweden are poor and must improve before the Nordic state’s bid for NATO membership is approved, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said at the Qatar Economic Forum.
“The political relationship between Sweden and Hungary is awfully wrong, and we have to improve first,” Orban said. “We would not like to import conflicts into NATO first.”
Earlier, Orban’s chief of staff said that the bilateral ties between Hungary and Sweden have hit an all-time low. He also accused Swedish politicians of “making a habit of continually questioning the state of democracy in Hungary,” as well as “insulting Hungarian voters and MPs, and, through them, the whole of Hungary.”
No date has been set yet as to when the Hungarian parliament will vote on the Swedish bid for admission, which has to be ratified by all current members.
While commenting on Orban’s latest statement, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reiterated his hope that Sweden’s application will be approved and recommended doing so. Among others, Stoltenberg cited the Turkish election and Sweden’s new anti-terror laws as factors that may facilitate the Nordic country’s accession. At the same time, Stoltenberg said that the upcoming NATO summit in Vilnius, Lithuania merely offers “a possibility, not a guarantee.”
However, Swedish media have been circulating reports that the government’s plan for Swedish NATO entry may be about to be postponed. Instead of being approved in Vilnius in July, a possibility of entering NATO only at the bloc’s meeting in Washington next April is now under consideration. Among others, this has sparked criticism from the Social Democrats, a heavyweight party that has dominated Sweden’s politics since the 1930s, over the lack of a plan B. For their part, the Social Democrats, now in opposition, have called for deepening Nordic cooperation, should the NATO entry be delayed.
Still, Foreign Minister Tobias Billstrom of the liberal-conservative Moderate Party that leads the current minority government confirmed that the goal for Stockholm is to join NATO in connection with the Vilnius summit.
Sweden and its neighbor Finland asked to join NATO last year, citing changes in the European security landscape following the conflict in Ukraine. While Finland went on to become a member, Sweden’s bid has been held up by Turkiye and Hungary, with Budapest citing grievances over Stockholm’s criticism of Orban’s record on democracy and the rule of law and Ankara accusing Sweden of harboring what it sees as Kurdish terrorists and, most recently, meddling in the Turkish elections.
Ukraine losing 10,000 drones per month to Russia: UK think tank

Press TV – May 23, 2023
Ukraine has suffered a massive loss of 10,000 drones per month in its war against Russia, which has effectively utilized electronic warfare to down the UAVs provided by the Western countries, a British think tank reports.
Russia’s use of technology-based defense systems has contributed to the staggering loss of Ukrainian drones amid the persisting use of navigational interference by the Russian military in the battle area as a form of electronic protection, the UK-based Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) unveiled in a new report.
The report appears to entirely dismiss earlier media campaigns by Western news outlets, blaming Russian use of a large number of “Iranian drones” for major losses inflicted on Ukrainian side. Both Tehran and Moscow had totally rejected such reports.
RUSI further insisted, Russia has demonstrated that it is “highly capable” of intercepting and decrypting Ukrainian military communications.
“Russian EW is also apparently achieving real-time interception and decryption of Ukrainian [US-made] Motorola 256-bit encrypted tactical communications systems, which are widely employed by the Armed Forces of Ukraine,” the report added.
It also pointed out that Russian troops have adjusted their sending of electronic warfare systems, setting one around each 10 kilometer along the front lines, which run through Ukraine’s eastern and southern districts.
According to the report, Ukraine’s monumental losses of drones include both military and commercial UAVs that have been heavily utilized for its war with Russia.
It then noted that Gyrocopter, a commercial drone, has been used for “reconnaissance” while other types have been used in direct assaults as well as targeting tools to coordinate artillery barrages.
Despite its incredibly high losses of UAVs, the report further underlines that Kiev is capable of making, purchasing and acquiring the required number of drones, without elaborating on the funding amid the country’s broken economy and the widely reported fact that it obtains nearly all of its weaponry through military grants from the US and the European Union.
Other changes have been identified in Russian military operations during the second year of the war, the RUSI report adds. It found that Russian forces are flexible and make changes to redress their deficiencies.
Although the Ukraine conflict has witnessed “high-tech tactics stalled or countered by rough terrain, electronic jammers and older tactics such as trench warfare, the use of drones has been a major part of both side’s doctrine,” the report emphasizes.
“In addition to reconnaissance purposes, they’ve been used in direct assaults as well as targeting tools to coordinate artillery barrages, the latter of which has been a dominant element in the conflict.”
The West has supplied Kiev with tens of billions of dollars worth of various weaponry since the onset of Russia’s “special military operation” in Ukraine last year.
Moscow insists it launched the operation as a security measure against persisting eastern advance of the US-led NATO military alliance and the protection of the Russian-speaking population in eastern Ukraine from abusive treatment by Kiev forces.
Western countries, led by the US, have been providing massive amounts of arms and munitions to Ukraine with a declared objective of prolonging the war against Russia and keeping Moscow engaged in a protracted conflict with neighboring Ukraine.
