UK, France sign deal to jointly develop new missiles
Press TV – March 29, 2017
Britain and France have signed an agreement to jointly develop long range missiles for future use by their navies and air forces.
British Minister for military purchases Harriett Baldwin and her visiting French counterpart Laurent Collet-Billon agreed in London on Tuesday to invest €50 million ( £43 million) each to begin a three-year concept phase for the project.
Dubbed the Future Cruise/Anti-Ship Weapon program, arms manufacturer MBDA would explore options to replace and improve existing naval and air force weapons systems over the next 10 years, according to a statement by the UK ministry of defense.
The concept phase is focused on determining the designs of the future weapons and cutting the risks to a minimum before heading to the next stage in the cooperation, the statement added.
Beside costs, both sides also agreed to freely use one another’s “national technology expertise, trials and test facilities.”
“As demonstrated by having Europe’s largest defense budget, the UK is committed to European security and we will continue to collaborate on joint defense programs across the continent,” Baldwin said.
Collet-Billon also hailed the agreement, calling it “the backbone of our ‘one complex weapon’ initiative.”
Formed by a merger of French Aérospatiale-Matra Missiles, Italian Alenia Marconi Systems and British Matra BAe Dynamics, MBDA already produces Storm Shadow/ SCALP EG long-range cruise missiles for the British and French air forces.
In late February, the two sides signed a £146 million deal to upgrade the £790,000 missile, which has a range of approximately 560 kilometers (300 nautical miles).
According to the British defense ministry, France is “the UK’s most important European Ally” and together, the two countries accounted for almost half of all military spending in Europe.
As London prepares to leave the European Union (EU) following last year’s July referendum, British officials have reassured their allies in Paris that nothing can undermine their military alliance.
“This is a day-to-day, intense partnership that has never been affected by whatever French or British-bashing was going on in either country in the last five years,” said Claire Chick, head of military affairs at the London-based Franco-British Council.
Why US Missile Defense May Trigger Development of ‘Satellite Killers’ in Russia
Sputnik – March 29, 2017
The US global missile defense system will threaten virtually all low Earth orbit spacecraft within the next 10-12 years, Russian experts Alexey Fenenko and Konstantin Sivkov told RIA Novosti. The experts suggested that one of the solutions to counter the threat is the development of similar systems by Russia.
The US anti-ballistic missile defense (ABM) system is likely to pose a real threat to the Russian low-altitude spacecraft in the near future, experts told RIA Novosti. They believe it may prompt Russia to begin developing similar systems.
Speaking at the Conference on Disarmament in Geneva, the Russian General Staff’s Deputy Chief Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir warned that virtually all low Earth orbit space will soon fall within the US global missile defense system’s killing zone.
That means that the space activities of any country, including Russia and China, will be under threat, Gen. Poznikhir highlighted.
Speaking to RIA Novosti, Alexey Fenenko, Associate Professor at Moscow State University’s World Politics Department, emphasized that the US missile defense system will really threaten the Russian orbital grouping of satellites in the next 10-12 years.
“This could become a threat in just 10-12 years, but Russia, unfortunately, has yet to take action; meanwhile China is developing its own anti-satellite weapons, and we will have to do the same,” Fenenko said.
According to Fenenko, the US continues to conduct tests of anti-satellite weapons within the framework of the country’s ABM program.
“The first time they tested it was in 1985; the second test was conducted in 2008. In addition, the US national space strategy of 2006 stressed the necessity of creating weapons able to destroy an adversary’s satellites as part of US missile defense [capabilities],” the Russian academic explained.
He also recalled that within the framework of its Prompt Global Strike project, the US carried out several unsuccessful attempts to test the so-called “space weapon” — low Earth orbit vehicles. However, following a series of unsuccessful tests, Washington has shifted its focus to anti-satellite systems (ASAT).
Russian military expert and First Vice President of the Academy of Geopolitical Studies Konstantin Sivkov echoes Fenenko, suggesting that the threat posed by the US missile defense may prompt Moscow to develop a system which would be able to hit US low Earth orbit spacecraft at a distance of thousands of kilometers.
“The Americans have carried out tests of their SM-3 missile, and they have managed to shoot down a satellite. We need to create our own missile systems,” Sivkov told RIA Novosti.
He specified that Russia needs to design systems which would be able to shoot down satellites at a distance of hundreds or thousands of kilometers.
“The S-500 [Prometey anti-ballistic missile system] was designed as a missile defense system for the theater of war; we need a system that would hit satellites in quasi-stationary orbit drifting a few thousand kilometers above the Earth,” Sivkov suggested.
Sivkov emphasized that Russia is currently not involved in developing these systems; however, according to the military analyst, the US efforts to bolster its missile defense may force Russia to kick off such a project.
Previously, in his January interview with RIA Novosti, Sivkov drew attention to US Air Force Gen. John E. Hyten’s calls for “deterrence in space.”
Gen. Hyten claimed that “in the not-so-distant future” Moscow and Beijing will be able to threaten US spacecraft.
“We have to prevent that and the best way to prevent war is to be prepared for war. So the United States is going to do that, and we’re going to make sure that everybody knows we’re prepared for war,” Hyten said in his speech at Stanford University’s Center for Security and Cooperation.
Stressing that Hyten’s claims bear no relation to reality, Sivkov warned that the Pentagon is about to start a new arms race.
“In fact this is the way to justify the beginning of the large-scale militarization of space by the United States, under the pretext of a Russian or Chinese threat,” the Russian expert stressed.
Encircling Russia? RAF Typhoon fighters will deploy to Romania in May
RT | March 28, 2017
Royal Air Force (RAF) fighter aircraft will deploy to Romania in May as part of NATO’s continued militarization of Eastern Europe.
The initiative will see four Typhoons from RAF Coningsby, Lincolnshire, deploy to Mihail Kogalniceanu Airbase in Romania until September.
They will carry out patrols of the Black Sea area as part of the Southern Air Policing mission conducted under NATO command. The UK is the first ally to provide aircraft for the task.
“The UK is stepping up its support for NATO’s collective defense from the north to the south of the alliance,” said Defense Secretary Michael Fallon.
“With this deployment, RAF planes will be ready to secure NATO airspace and provide reassurance to our allies in the Black Sea region,” he added.
The announcement follows the deployment of hundreds of British troops to Estonia to function as a ‘tripwire’ against what UK commanders have called Russian aggression.
The NATO battle group in Estonia will be stationed at Tapa.
The UK will contribute the bulk of multinational force in Estonia, sending in a total of 800 soldiers.
France will post 300 soldiers to Estonia – to be replaced by the Danes in 2018.
All troops will act in conjunction with Estonia’s 1st Infantry Brigade.The deployment is designed to counter an “increasingly assertive Russia,” Fallon said on the first 130 troops’ departure.
“NATO is stepping up its commitment to collective defense,” Fallon said, according to Sky News.
“British troops will play a leading role in Estonia and support our US allies in Poland, as part of wider efforts to defend NATO.”
Top US general in Europe urges arming Ukraine
RT | March 28, 2017
Washington must do more to deter “Russian aggression,” including sending lethal weapons to the government in Ukraine and engage in information warfare across the board, the top US commander in Europe told lawmakers.
“I personally believe that we need to consider lethal defensive weapons for Ukraine,” General Curtis M. Scaparrotti, head of the US European Command (EUCOM) told the House Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.
“I haven’t discussed that specific issue with most of our partners,” Scaparrotti admitted when he was asked about the NATO allies’ opinion on arming Kiev. The general is also the NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR).
“Russia seeks to undermine this international system and discredit those in the West who have created it,” Scaparrotti argued in his opening remarks, calling for “demonstrating strength in every area” when it comes to dealing with Moscow.
He also accused Russia of threatening every country in its vicinity, stoking ethnic tensions in the Balkans, “complicating” US operations against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) in Syria and violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty by deploying land-based cruise missiles.
For its part, Moscow has rejected insinuations it was violating the 1988 treaty.
“There have not been violations from our side,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov told Argumenty i Fakty weekly, answering accusations about the breach of the INF. “The United States claim the opposite, but they do not provide any information that could be verified in order to clarify the situation.”
At the hearing on Tuesday, however, Scaparrotti and the lawmakers were of the same mind that Russia was an adversary and a threat in every respect. In addition to arming the government in Ukraine and building up the US military presence in Europe, the general advocated information warfare as well.
“Going forward, we must bring the information aspects of our national power more fully to bear on Russia, both to amplify our narrative and to draw attention to Russia’s manipulative, coercive, and malign activities,” he said.
Scaparrotti’s predecessor, General Philip M. Breedlove, had worked for years with State Department and other Washington insiders to push the Obama administration to be more belligerent towards Russia, according to his private emails released by DCLeaks in July 2016, shortly after Breedlove’s retirement. Last week, Breedlove testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee, calling once again for arming the government in Kiev.
US ABM shield in Europe may lead to sudden nuclear attack on Russia, Moscow says
RT | March 28, 2017
The US’ ABM sites in Europe and on warships patrolling Russia’s borders are creating the potential for America to launch an overwhelming surprise nuclear strike on Russia, the Russian general staff said.
“The presence of American ABM sites in Europe and ABM-capable ships in the seas and oceans close to Russia’s territory creates a powerful clandestine potential for delivering a surprise nuclear missile strike against Russia,” Viktor Poznikhir, deputy head of operations of the Russian general staff, told a disarmament conference in Geneva.
The Conference on Disarmament being held in Switzerland over five days this week is an international forum focusing on global security and the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction with the participation of 65 member states.
The US’ global antiballistic missile system is provoking a new arms race, Russia’s top brass has warned, adding that the US system, which includes sites in Alaska, Romania, and Poland, compromises Russia’s nuclear deterrence capabilities.
Russia estimates that by 2020 the US will have as many as 1,000 interceptor missiles at its disposal, which would be a threat to Russia’s missile capacity.
“The presence of the global ABM system lowers the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, because it gives the US the illusion of impunity for using strategic offensive weapons from under the protection of the ABM ‘umbrella,’” Poznikhir said.
“The ABM shield is a symbol of the build-up of rocket forces in the world and a trigger for a new arms race.”
Poznikhir also said that the American system poses a risk to the peaceful use of space by other nations.
He said the US is continuing to develop the system under a pretext of countering a perceived threat from North Korea and Iran, while ignoring Russia’s wider concerns.
The US’ attempt to get an advantage over Russia and China is undermining the global security system, Russia’s top brass said.
Poznikhir rejected the US’ contention that the ABM shield is incapable of intercepting all of Russia’s ICBMs if Moscow fires them en masse, and thus does not undermine its security, noting that the system can already intercept some missiles and would only become more capable in the future.
The US’ continuing development of the ABM shield “narrows down the opportunity for nuclear reduction dialogue,” the Russian official argued.
The World Faces a Historic Opportunity to Ban Nuclear Weapons
By Beatrice Fihn, Martin Butcher, and Rasha Abdul Rahim | Inter Press Service | March 24, 2017
Nuclear weapons are once again high on the international agenda, and experts note that the risk of a nuclear detonation is the highest since the Cold War.
As global tensions, uncertainty and risks of conflict rise amongst nuclear-armed states, nuclear weapons are treated as sabres to rattle, further heightening the risks of intentional or inadvertent use.
Nuclear weapons are the most destructive, inhumane and indiscriminate weapons ever created. Both in terms of the scale of the immediate devastation they cause and the threat of a uniquely persistent, pervasive and genetically damaging radioactive fallout, they would cause unacceptable harm to civilians.
But while the nuclear-armed states are implementing policies based on unpredictability, nationalism and weakening of international institutions, the majority of the world’s states are preparing to finally outlaw nuclear weapons.
Setsuko Thurlow, a survivor of Hiroshima, described the nuclear bombing as blinding the whole city with its flash, being flattened by a hurricane-like blast, and burned in the 4,000-degree Celsius heat. She said a bright summer morning turned to a dark twilight in seconds with smoke and dust rising from the mushroom cloud, and the dead and injured covering the ground, begging desperately for water, and receiving no medical care at all. The spreading firestorm and the foul stench of burnt flesh filled the air.
A single nuclear bomb detonated over a large city could kill millions of people and cause catastrophic and long-term damage to the environment. The use of tens or hundreds of nuclear bombs would be cataclysmic, severely disrupting the global climate and causing widespread famine.
Strikes of this kind would invariably violate international humanitarian law and international human rights law, yet, these weapons are still not explicitly and universally prohibited under international law. Nine states are known to possess them and many more continue to rely on them through military alliances.
The alarming evidence presented by physicians, physicists, climate scientists, human rights organisations, humanitarian agencies, and survivors of nuclear weapons attacks have been successful in changing the discourse, and opened space for greater engagement from civil society, international organisations, and states.
Because the humanitarian and environmental consequences of using nuclear weapons would be global and catastrophic, eliminating such dangers is the responsibility of all governments in accordance with their obligation to ensure respect for international humanitarian law.
The world is now facing a historic opportunity to prohibit nuclear weapons.
In October last year, a majority of the world’s states at the United Nations General Assembly agreed to start negotiations of a new legally binding treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons, in line with other treaties that prohibit chemical and biological weapons, landmines and cluster munitions.
As we’ve seen with these weapons, an international prohibition has created a strong norm against their use and speed up their elimination.
The negotiations will start at the United Nations in New York on 27-31 March, and continue on 15 June-7 July, with the aim of concluding a legally binding instrument to prohibit nuclear weapons.
Amnesty International, Oxfam and the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) believe that it is time to negotiate a treaty that would prohibit the use, possession, production and transfer of nuclear weapons, given their indiscriminate nature. No state, including permanent members of the UN Security Council, should possess nuclear weapons.
This is the moment to stand up for international law, multilateralism and international institutions. All governments should seize this opportunity and participate actively in the negotiations of a treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons in 2017.
Arms Race Fears Roused in Sweden by Saab’s Indiscriminate Campaigning
Sputnik – 27.03.2017
As the Swedish manufacturer Saab experiences growing problems trying to market its Gripen fighter jet, the company is forced to try and woo previously unbeknown markets. This, however, has attracted criticism from peace researchers, who claim the move contradicts Sweden’s long-lasting foreign policy goals.
A group of peace researchers from Uppsala University condemned Saab’s campaigning in Botswana, saying the move was in direct conflict with Sweden’s foreign policy goals. These are peace, human rights and poverty reduction, according to an opinion piece published by the Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet.
In 2016, a high-ranking Swedish delegation, led by Defense Minister Peter Hultqvist, toured Botswana. The subsequent scandal involving ballooning costs diverted Swedes’ attention from more pressing issues, such as Sweden’s plans to market JAS 39 Gripen fighter jets to the African nation. According to peace researchers Johan Brosché, Kristine Höglund and Sebastian van Baalen, the deal is highly controversial, especially given the bribery scandals that followed a similar deal with South Africa.
Firstly, in Botswana, which has long been touted as an African success story in terms of equality, human rights and economic development, democracy has gradually eroded. The country’s government is hardly an eligible partner for Sweden, which is trying to emerge as a champion of human rights on the international arena. Botswana, according to Uppsala University researchers, is clearly heading in an authoritarian direction, with growing surveillance, reduced opportunities for freedom of expression and reprisals against anti-government views.
Secondly, a Saab deal would contradict Sweden’s goal of combating poverty, as Botswana is facing major economic problems. Over a fifth of its population of two million live in absolute poverty and subsist on less than two dollars a day, despite the country’s large diamond resources. The billions to be invested in fighter jets would undermine efforts to curb unemployment, and fight drought and corruption.
Third, the idea of Botswana acquiring a fleet of advanced fighter aircraft may trigger a regional arms race, with Namibia and other neighboring countries to follow suit, with detrimental consequences for everyone but the arms dealers. At present, Botswana is not faced with any direct external threat and it is unclear why huge sums must be invested in the acquisition of advanced fighter jets. Whereas the need to protect the country’s tourism industry, combat poaching and monitor the flow of refugees previously were indicated as reasons, none of these problems can be solved with advanced fighter jets.
The Swedish researchers concluded that the arms deal with Botswana would worsen the economic and democratic development in the country, undermine regional security and mar Sweden’s reputation in Southern Africa.
The Saab JAS 39 Gripen is a light single-engine multi-role fighter aircraft in the same class as Airbus’ Eurofighter Typhoon, the Rafale by Dassault and Lockheed Martin’s Joint Strike Fighter.
Despite Saab’s ambitious hopes for the Gripen to “dominate the market,” the company’s bids were consequently rejected by Norway, Poland, Denmark and the Netherlands. The Rafale and the Eurofighter Typhoon are also regarded as favorites in Malaysia, where the government will decide on an aircraft fleet upgrade.
So far, Sweden remains the largest consumer of the Gripen, with an order of 60 new-generation Gripens placed by the Defense Ministry. Saab’s agreement with Brazil on 36 planes worth 40 billion SEK ($4.5bln) remains the company’s largest overseas success. Other Gripen consumers include South Africa and Thailand, while the Czech Republic continues to rent Gripens from Sweden.
McCain: ‘New World Order Under Enormous Strain’ Without US, EU Leadership
Sputnik – 27.03.2017
US Senator John McCain said on Friday that the world desperately needs the US and Europe to unite once more to preserve globalism.
The current chairman of the armed services committee in the US Senate said that Washington should restore cooperation with the EU — long one of America’s “most important alliances.”
The remarks came at the Brussels Forum, a conference organized by the transatlantic think tank German Marshall Fund. The globalist ideologue, who once was a presidential candidate for the Republican Party, has once again put himself in direct opposition to President Trump by saying that it is essential for the allies to develop more connectivity and cooperation.
“I trust the EU,” he said, elaborating that EU and NATO were “the best two sums in history” and have maintained global peace for the last 70 years.
“We need to rely on NATO and have a NATO that adjusts to new challenges.”
Earlier in January the new US President Donald Trump complimented the UK on its “smart” decision to withdraw from the EU and dubbed NATO an “obsolete” coalition.
McCain said he supported Trump’s calls on Europe to increase defense spending for NATO, but added that Americans should “also appreciate the fact that over 1,000 young [European] people have given their lives in Afghanistan or Iraq.”
“I don’t know what price tag you put on that,” he said. “That’s quite a contribution I would say, if you ask their mothers.”
McCain hesitated to prejudge Trump’s presidency based on his first months in office but said that he should fill intelligence gaps and address what the Senator believes was Russia’s attempts to influence the outcome of the US election in November.
McCain also accused Russia of trying to influence approaching elections in France and Germany, and the president of Russia Vladimir Putin in particular in trying to restore the Russian empire, despite providing no evidence for those allegations.
Japanese scientists reject lifting of ban on military research at universities
RT | March 26, 2017
The influential Science Council of Japan (SCJ) adopted a statement rejecting research at civilian institutions for military purposes. It comes in response to government investment in dual-use technologies.
The SCJ, which was created in 1949 as an independent body representing academia, warned Japanese universities and research institutions against participating in military-related research, the Japan Times reported. In a statement adopted by the council’s executive body on Friday, it said taking grants from the defense ministry would compromise scientific independence.
It comes after 10 months of deliberation by a 15-member committee, which was formed in May 2016 to consider whether the long-held opposition to military research should be overturned. The SCJ previously rejected military research in 1950, and again in 1967.
The policy statement carries no legal force, but the council’s opinion carries great weigh in Japanese scientific circles and the government.
The council was called to revise its policy, after Japan’s Defense Ministry boosted its funding of research into dual-use technologies, which can have both civilian and military applications. The funding almost doubled for 2017 to $96 million, compared to the previous year, according to The Asahi Shimbun.
The decision to reject military research came earlier in March. At the meeting on Friday, the council’s board debated on whether to adopt the statement directly or submit it to the SCJ General Assembly, which is to convene next month. The executives chose the former.
Japanese academia remains reluctant to deal with military technologies for historical reasons. Imperial Japan rounded up scientists to participate in the war effort during World War II.
Read more:




