LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum


 FAQFAQ   RechercherRechercher   MembresMembres   GroupesGroupes   S’enregistrerS’enregistrer 
 ProfilProfil   Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés   ConnexionConnexion 

Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 3140, 141, 142170, 171, 172  >
Sujet précédent :: Sujet suivant  
Auteur Message

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 13 Juin - 04:29 (2017)    Sujet du message: 2017 INDEX OF U.S. MILITARY STRENGTH Répondre en citant


Download Assessment
View 2016 Assessment

The resurgence of Russia, brought into starkest relief in Ukraine, and the rise of the Islamic State in Iraq, Syria, and Libya have brought Europe back into the top tier of U.S. international interests with some force after a decade of attempted disengagement. It is clear why the region matters to the U.S. The 51 countries in the U.S. European Command (EUCOM) area of responsibility include approximately one-fifth of the world’s population, 10.7 million square miles of land, and 13 million square miles of ocean. EUCOM’s area has physical borders with Russia, the Arctic, Iran, Asia Minor, the Caspian Sea, and North Africa. Most of these areas have long histories of instability and a potential for future instability that could directly affect the security interests and economic well-being of the United States.

Some of America’s oldest (France) and closest (the United Kingdom) allies are found in Europe. The U.S. and Europe share a strong commitment to the rule of law, human rights, free markets, and democracy. Many of these ideas, the foundations upon which America was built, were brought over by the millions of immigrants from Europe in the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries. U.S. sacrifice for Europe has been dear. During the course of the 20th century, millions of Americans fought for a free and secure Europe, and hundreds of thousands died.

America’s economic ties to the region are important as well. A stable, secure, and economically viable Europe is in America’s economic interest. Regional security means economic viability and prosperity for both Europe and the U.S. For more than 70 years, the U.S. military presence in Europe has contributed to European stability, economically benefiting both Europeans and Americans. The economies of the 28 (soon to be 271) member states of the European Union (EU), along with the United States, account for approximately half of the global economy. The U.S. and the members of the EU are each other’s principal trading partners.

Geographical Proximity. Europe is important to the U.S. because of its geographical proximity to some of the world’s most dangerous and contested regions. From the eastern Atlantic Ocean to the Middle East and up to the Caucasus through Russia and into the Arctic, an arc of instability is increasingly unsettled by demographic pressures, rising commodity prices, interstate and intrastate conflict, tribal politics, competition over water and other natural resources, religious tension, revolutionary tendencies, terrorism, nuclear proliferation, and “frozen conflicts” (i.e., conflicts in which active combat has ended but no real effort is made to resolve the conflict). The European region also has some of the world’s most vital shipping lanes, energy resources, and trade choke points.

The basing of U.S. forces in Europe generates benefits outside of Europe. Recent instability in North Africa, most notably ISIS operations in Libya, has shown the utility of basing robust U.S. military capabilities near potential global hot spots. For example, when ordered to intervene in Libya against Muammar Qadhafi, U.S. commanders in Europe were able to act effectively and promptly because of the well-established and mature U.S. military footprint in southern Europe.

The same can be said of the Baltic region. Soon after Russia annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine, the U.S. quickly deployed 600 U.S. soldiers to the Baltics and Poland from U.S. bases in Italy. The F-15s and F-16s (including their crews, maintenance staff, fuel, spare parts, etc.) that the U.S. Air Force initially sent to the region after the invasion of Ukraine were deployed to Eastern Europe from U.S. air bases in the United Kingdom and Italy, respectively. Without this forward presence in Europe, these deployments would have been costlier and slower.

The Arctic. The 2016 Index of U.S. Military Strength identified the Arctic as an important operating environment in Europe. This has not changed in the 2017 edition. If anything, tension continues to increase as a result of Russian activity.

The Arctic region encompasses the lands and territorial waters of eight countries (Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States) spread across three continents. The region is home to some of the world’s roughest terrain and waters and some of its harshest weather. The Arctic region is rich in minerals, wildlife, fish, and other natural resources and, according to some estimates, contains up to 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves and almost one-third of its undiscovered natural gas reserves.

The region represents one of the world’s least populated areas, with sparse nomadic communities and very few large cities and towns. Although official population figures are nonexistent, the Nordic Council of Ministers estimates that the figure in 2013 was slightly in excess of 4 million,2 making the Arctic’s population slightly bigger than Oregon’s and slightly smaller than Kentucky’s. Approximately half of the Arctic population lives in Russia, which is ranked 153rd out of 178 countries in the 2016 Index of Economic Freedom.3

The melting of Arctic ice during the summer months presents challenges for the U.S. in terms of Arctic security, but it also provides new opportunities for economic development. Less ice will mean new shipping lanes, increased tourism, and further exploration for natural resources. Many of the shipping lanes currently used in the Arctic are a considerable distance from search and rescue facilities, and natural resource exploration that would be considered routine in other locations in the world is complex, costly, and dangerous in the Arctic.

The economic incentives for exploiting these shipping lanes are substantial and will drive Arctic nations to press their interests in the region. For example, using the Northern Sea Route (NSR) along the Russian coast cuts the distance between Rotterdam and Shanghai by 22 percent and saves hundreds of thousands of dollars in fuel costs per ship. Unlike in the Gulf of Aden, no pirates are currently operating in the Arctic, and piracy is unlikely to be a problem in the future. But there is still a long way to go before the NSR becomes a viable option. In 2015, a total of 18 ships4 made the journey over the top of Russia (compared with the more than 17,000 that transited the Suez Canal) and carried only 39,586 tons of cargo.5 By comparison, in 2013, 71 vessels carrying a total of 1,355,000 tons of cargo shipped along the route, indicating the unpredictability of future shipping trends in the Arctic.6

In June 2015, Russia adopted an Integrated Development Plan for the Northern Sea Route 2015–2030. The plan outlines expectations that NSR shipping volume will reach 80 million tons by 2030.7 However, the current reality casts doubt on these projections.

Of course, the U.S. has an interest in stability and security in the Arctic because the U.S. is one of the eight Arctic nations. The American commitment to NATO is also relevant because four of the five Arctic littoral powers are in NATO.8

Threats to Internal Stability. In recent years, Europe has faced turmoil and instability brought about by economic uncertainty, epitomized by the ongoing sovereign debt crisis in Europe’s southern countries. Recently, a large influx of migrants and the continued threat from terrorism have added more instability points to Europe.

Economically, the eurozone’s overall economic freedom is seriously undermined by the excessive government spending required to support elaborate welfare states. Economic policies being pursued by many eurozone countries hinder productivity growth and job creation, causing economic stagnation and rapidly increasing levels of public debt. Underperforming countries have not made the structural reforms needed for long-term adjustment.

Cyprus, Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain have received multibillion-euro aid packages financed by their eurozone partners and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). European leaders are desperately seeking a way to keep the eurozone together without addressing the root causes of the crisis. Recipient countries have adopted stringent austerity measures in exchange for aid, but their populations oppose any spending cuts.

Many among Europe’s political elite believe that deeper European integration, not prudent economic policies, is the answer to Europe’s problem. However, there has been a public backlash against deeper political and economic integration across much of Europe. In a June 2016 referendum on EU membership, the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. In April 2016, Dutch voters voted against approving an EU–Ukraine Association agreement in a countrywide referendum, largely seen as a protest vote against the EU. Dissatisfaction with the EU affects France and Germany as well. According to a 2016 Pew Poll, only 38 percent of people in France have a favorable view of the EU; in 2004, 69 percent did. In Germany, only half of Germans have a favorable view of the EU.9

In 2015, the Eurozone grew by 1.7 percent,10 only a marginal improvement over 2014 growth rates. Relatively meager economic growth translated into small job gains, but unemployment remains an albatross around the neck of many European nations. Unemployment across the 19-country bloc stands at 10.1 percent, the lowest rate since July 2011 but still stubbornly high.11 At 23.3 percent, Greece has the highest unemployment rate in the EU; Spain has an unemployment rate of 19.9 percent.12

Youth unemployment in the eurozone is 20.8 percent but reaches 47.4 percent in Greece, 45.8 percent in Spain, 36.5 percent in Italy, and 30.1 percent in Croatia.13

The potential impact of this crisis on the U.S. makes European economic stability more important than ever. The eurozone crisis could turn into a security crisis. For example, political instability in Greece, made worse by a large influx of migrants, could spill over to other places in southeastern Europe—already one of Europe’s most unstable regions. American banks hold some eurozone debt and would take a hit in the event of any default, but the deepest effects would likely be felt through the interconnected global financial system. In a lagging European economy, for example, U.S. exports to European markets would start to fall off and continue to decline.

The economic situation also illustrates the importance of the greater European region to energy security and the free flow of trade. Some of the most important energy security and trade corridors are on the periphery of Europe—as are some of the world’s most dangerous and unstable regions. European economies depend on oil and gas transported through the volatile Caucasus and several maritime choke points.

On top of these difficulties, Europe has been trying to deal with a large-scale migrant crisis. Conflicts in Syria and Iraq, as well as open-door policies adopted by several European nations—importantly, Germany and Sweden in 2015—have led large numbers of refugees from across Africa, Asia, and the Middle East to travel to Europe in search of safety, economic opportunity, and a better life in Europe’s most generous welfare states.

The European Union’s Frontex border agency documented 1,820,000 detections of illegal border crossings along the external borders of the EU in 2015.14 The real number is far higher. The migrant crisis and the response of European governments have led in part to some increased instability, have buoyed fringe political parties in some European nations, and already have imposed financial, security, and societal costs on the continent.

For example, one study found that the cost in Germany to house, provide benefits for, and work to assimilate migrants will equal €50 billion by 2017.15 Greece expects to spend €600 million, 0.3 percent of its GDP, on the migrant crisis in 2016.16 In April 2016, Sweden’s Finance Ministry announced projections that the migrant crisis will cost the nation €6.1 billion yearly until 2020.17 In an era of fiscal austerity and tight budgets, the unexpected and generational cost of this migrant crisis will affect European budgets for decades.

The migrant crisis has had a direct impact on NATO resources as well. In February 2016, Germany, Greece, and Turkey requested NATO assistance against illegal trafficking and illegal migration in the Aegean Sea.18 That month, NATO’s Standing Maritime Group 2 deployed to the Aegean to conduct surveillance, monitoring, and reconnaissance of smuggling activities, and the intelligence gathered was sent on to Greek and Turkish coast guards and to Frontex.19 In February 2016, former Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, General Philip Breedlove accused Russia of using migrants as a weapon against Europe.20

Finally, Europe has suffered a string of terrorist attacks, many of them Islamist inspired, including attacks in Belgium, France, Germany, and Turkey during the past year alone. While terrorist attacks do not pose an existential threat to Europe, they do affect security by increasing instability, and forcing nations to spend more manpower and financial resources on counterterrorism activities.

Following attacks on the offices of satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in January 2015, for example, France launched Operation Sentinelle, utilizing French soldiers to guard 682 sensitive tourist attractions, schools, and religious institutions.21Following multiple terrorist attacks in Paris in November 2015, President Francois Hollande increased the number of troops taking part in Operation Sentinelle to 10,000.22 Of the French military deployed for military operations, half have been deployed domestically to guard against terrorist attacks.23 The deployment is reportedly having a deleterious impact both on morale among soldiers and on readiness.24 In addition to manpower strains, Operation Sentinelle costs France $1.06 million a day,25 and early estimates from the French Treasury suggest that terrorism will ultimately cost the French economy $2.1 billion.26

In addition, Belgium deployed over 500 soldiers to its streets to guard against terrorist attacks following the November attacks in Paris.27 In February 2015, Italy deployed 4,800 soldiers domestically to guard against terrorist attacks.28 There has even been a discussion in Germany of allowing for greater deployment of the German Bundeswehr to guard against terrorist attacks. Under the current German constitution, the army can be deployed domestically only “in cases of national emergency.”29

The migrant crisis in Europe has exacerbated the threat from terrorism. General Breedlove testified in March 2016 that “what we have seen growing in the past months and year is that in that flow of refugees we see criminality, terrorism and foreign fighters.”30 James Clapper, U.S. Director of National Intelligence, testified similarly in February 2016 that ISIS is “taking advantage of the torrent of migrants to insert operatives into that flow. As well, they also have available to them and are pretty skilled at phony passports so they can travel ostensibly as legitimate travelers as well.”31

While terrorism in Europe may undermine U.S. allies by siphoning financial and military resources toward counterterrorism operations, it also can jeopardize the safety of U.S. servicemembers, their families, and U.S. facilities overseas. In April 2016, for example, an ISIS sympathizer was convicted in the U.K. of planning to carry out terrorist attacks on U.S. military personnel stationed in the U.K.32

The South Caucasus
One of the most important energy corridors for Europe is through Turkey and the South Caucasus. Fortunately, Europe has a very strong partner in the South Caucasus. The Republic of Georgia sits at a crucial geographical and cultural crossroads that for centuries has proven to be strategically important, both militarily and economically; today, its strategic location is also important to the U.S. and Europe. Georgia is modernizing key airports and port facilities, and a major railway project from Azerbaijan to Turkey through Georgia opened in 2015.

The transit route through Georgia provides one of the shortest and potentially most cost-effective routes to Central Asia. This is particularly important in meeting the need to bring alternative sources of oil and natural gas to the European market. In view of Russia’s willingness to use energy resources as a tool of foreign policy, this could not come at a more important time for Europe.

In 2015, construction began on two key natural gas pipelines: the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) and the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline (TAP). The TANAP will run 1,150 miles through the Caucasus and Turkey; the TAP will run from the Turkish–Greek border to Italy via Albania and the Adriatic Sea. It is expected that both will be completed by 2018. When constructed, both pipelines will link up with the existing South Caucasus Pipeline, which connects Turkey to the Azerbaijani gas fields in the Caspian Sea through Georgia. Together, all three pipelines will form the so-called Southern Gas Corridor.33

In July 2015, Russia took de facto control of a 1.6-kilometer section of the British Petroleum–operated Baku–Supsa pipeline when it moved border markers from Russian-controlled South Ossetia 300 meters (980 feet) further south. Russia’s creeping annexation in Georgia has expanded its territorial control in the nation and placed border markers within close range of Georgia’s main highway linking Azerbaijan and the Black Sea.34

Georgia has been a strong partner of NATO and the U.S. It retains 861 troops in Afghanistan as part of NATO’s Resolute Support Mission, the third-largest contribution after the U.S. and Germany,35 and also trains with NATO nations. In May 2016, 650 U.S. soldiers, 150 from the U.K., and 500 Georgians took part in training exercise Noble Partner in Georgia.36 Georgian Defense Minister Tina Khidasheli described Noble Partner as “one of the biggest exercises that our country has ever hosted…the biggest number of troops on the ground, and the largest concentration of military equipment.”37

Important Alliances and 
Bilateral Relations in Europe
The United States has a number of important multilateral and bilateral relationships in Europe. First and foremost is NATO, the world’s most important and arguably most successful defense alliance. Other relationships, however, also have a strong impact on the U.S.’s ability to operate in and through the European region.
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO is an intergovernmental, multilateral security organization originally designed to defend Western Europe from the Soviet Union. It is the organization that anchored the U.S. firmly in Europe, solidified Western resolve during the Cold War, and rallied European support following the terrorist attacks on 9/11.

During the Cold War, the threat from the Soviet Union meant that the alliance had a clearly defined mission. Today, NATO is still trying to determine its precise role in the post–Cold War world. In the 1990s, NATO launched security and peacekeeping operations in the Balkans when the EU was unable to act. Since 2002, it has been engaged in Afghanistan, counterpiracy operations off the Horn of Africa, an intervention in Libya that led to the toppling of Muammar Qadhafi, and (most recently) efforts to stop illicit trafficking in people, drugs, weapons, and other contraband in the Mediterranean.

Since its creation in 1949, NATO has remained the bedrock of transatlantic security cooperation, and it is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. With the NATO-led combat mission in Afghanistan finished and with an increasingly bellicose Russia on Europe’s doorstep, there is a growing recognition that NATO must return to its raison d’être: collective defense.

Today, many NATO countries view Moscow as a threat. In a way that seemed inconceivable to Western Europeans before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and annexation of Crimea, it is now clear that NATO’s Eastern European members face legitimate security concerns: For those NATO members that lived under the iron fist of the Warsaw Pact or that were absorbed into the Soviet Union after World War II, Russia’s bellicose behavior is seen as a threat to their existence.

The broad threat that Russia poses to Europe’s common interests makes military-to-military cooperation, interoperability, and overall preparedness for joint warfighting especially important in Europe, yet they are not uniformly implemented. For example, day-to-day interaction between U.S. and allied officer corps and joint preparedness exercises were more regular with Western European militaries than with frontier allies in Central Europe, although the crisis in Ukraine has led to new exercises with eastern NATO nations. In the event of a national security crisis in Europe, first contact with an adversary might still expose America’s lack of familiarity with allied warfighting capabilities, doctrines, and operational methods.

Following the 2014 Wales summit, NATO announced its intent to create a Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), “a new Allied joint force that will be able to deploy within a few days to respond to challenges that arise, particularly at the periphery of NATO’s territory.”38 However, mustering the 5,000-strong force has proven to be difficult.39 In addition, NATO reportedly believes the VJFT would be too vulnerable during its deployment phase to be utilized in Poland or the Baltics.40 At the Warsaw summit in July 2016, NATO agreed to an enhanced forward presence of one rotational battalion in each of the Baltic States and Poland, beginning in 2017. Canada, Germany, the U.S., and the UK have promised to serve as framework nations for the battalions.

For its part, in June 2014, the U.S. announced a $1 billion European Reassurance Initiative (ERI) meant to bolster transatlantic security. For fiscal year (FY) 2017, the U.S. proposed an increase in ERI funding to $3.4 billion. A portion of the funding was set aside to “increase exercises, training, and rotational presence across Europe but especially on the territory of our newer allies.”41 Additional funding for training exercises constituted $40.6 million of ERI funding in FY 2015, increased to $108.4 million in FY 2016, and is anticipated to increase to $163 million in FY 2017.42 While the additional funding is a step in the right direction, it is not a long-term solution; the need to sufficiently fund training programs remains unresolved. Funding for this initiative was included in the Overseas Contingency Operation (OCO) budget, generally considered to be a budget for temporary priorities—a fact that did not escape the attention of NATO allies, with the Poles dismissing it as “insufficient.”43

There also are non-military threats to the territorial integrity of NATO countries that the alliance has only recently begun to find ways to address. The most likely threat to the Baltic States, for example, may come not from Russian tanks rolling into a country but from Russian money, propaganda, and establishment of pro-Russia NGOs and other advocacy groups—all of which can be leveraged to undermine the state. Russia’s aggressive actions in Ukraine have proven how effective these asymmetrical methods can be in creating instability, especially when coupled with conventional power projection.

The combat training center at Hohenfels, Germany, is one of a very few located outside of the continental United States, and more than 60,000 U.S. and allied personnel train there annually. U.S.–European training exercises further advance U.S. interests by developing links between America’s allies in Europe and National Guard units back in the U.S. In a time when most American servicemembers do not recall World War II or the Cold War, cementing bonds with allies in Europe becomes a vital task. Currently, 22 nations in Europe have a state partner in the U.S. National Guard.44

General Breedlove has described NATO forces as being “at a pinnacle of interoperability.” But he also has cautioned that if NATO is to sustain these levels of interoperability, “We need to continue to build the capabilities and capacities to be a credible and effective Alliance and we need to sustain our interoperability through rigorous and sustained training, education, and exercises.”45

In 2014, the U.S. launched Operation Atlantic Resolve, a series of continuous exercises meant to reassure U.S. allies in Europe, particularly those bordering Russia. Operation Atlantic Resolve included among other initiatives 150 troops temporarily deployed to the Baltic States and Poland for training exercises.46 The troops were members of the Army’s 173rd Airborne Brigade, based in Italy and Germany.47 There have been some reports that U.S. soldiers stationed in the Baltics have been on the receiving end of “intimidatory approaches” from Russian intelligence officers.48 In March 2015, a U.S. convoy of 600 soldiers and 120 vehicles, including Strykers, took part in a 1,100-mile “Dragoon Ride” across the Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland before returning to base in Vilseck, Germany.49

The naval component of Operation Atlantic Resolve has consisted in part of increased deployments of U.S. ships to the Baltic and Black Seas. Additionally, the Navy has taken part in bilateral and NATO exercises. For example, BALTOPS 2015 was a 15-day exercise across the Baltic Sea region that involved 5,600 troops from Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States.50

In addition to training with fellow NATO member states, the U.S., in conjunction with Canada, Lithuania, and the United Kingdom,51 has undertaken a program to train five Ukrainian army battalions and an additional battalion of special operations forces52 at the Joint International Peacekeeping Security Center near Yavoriv, Ukraine. U.S. training for Ukrainian forces began with border and national guards but has expanded to include regular army units.53 Ukraine has received additional training from NATO members that includes counter-IED training, flight safety, military police, and medical training.54 In September 2015, the U.S. and Ukraine cohosted the multinational maritime exercise Sea Breeze 2015 in the Black Sea.55

Quality of Armed Forces in the Region
When it comes to effective international combined operations, , it is clear that Europe is not pulling its weight. Investment in defense across Europe has declined since the end of the Cold War. For most EU countries, the political will to deploy troops into harm’s way when doing so is in the national interest has all but evaporated. During the Libya operation, for example, European countries were running out of munitions.56 More recently, munition stocks in the Netherlands are reported to have only five days’ worth of ammunition on hand.57

As an intergovernmental security alliance, NATO is only as strong as its member states. Of NATO’s 28 members, 26 are European. European countries collectively have more than 2 million men and women in uniform, yet by some estimates, only 100,000 of them—a mere 5 percent—have the capability to deploy beyond their national borders.58

Article 3 of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty, NATO’s founding document, states that members, at a minimum, will “maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.”59 Only a handful of NATO members can say that they are living up to their Article 3 commitment. In 2015, only five of 28 NATO member states (Estonia, Greece, Poland, the U.S., and the U.K.) spent the required 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP) on defense. Recently, NATO total defense expenditures have moved in an upward direction. In 2016, the annual real change in defense outlays for Canada and European NATO members is estimated at 1.5 percent, a $3 billion increase.60 When cuts have occurred, they have been significantly less than in recent years. In 2015, 19 NATO members stopped cuts in defense spending, and 16 of those 19 also increased their defense spending in real terms.61

Nevertheless, the lack of overall investment in substantial amounts has caused even smaller campaigns like the 2011 operation in Libya to flounder. What began as a military operation inspired by France and Britain had to be absorbed quickly into a NATO operation because the Europeans had neither the political will nor the military capability (without the U.S.) to complete the mission. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates summed up Europe’s contribution to the Libya operation:

[W]hile every alliance member voted for the Libya mission, less than half have participated at all, and fewer than a third have been willing to participate in the strike mission. Frankly, many of those allies sitting on the sidelines do so not because they do not want to participate, but simply because they can’t. The military capabilities simply aren’t there.62

The lack of defense investment by Europeans has also had a direct impact on recent overseas operations. At the height of the combat operations in Afghanistan, many European NATO members were having difficulty deploying just dozens of troops at a time. The Europeans’ contribution to the air campaign against the Islamic State has been meager considering the size of their air forces. When Europeans do send troops, many are often restricted by numerous nationally imposed limitations on their activities (commonly called “caveats”). In Afghanistan, examples included no flying at night or no combat patrols beyond a certain distance from a base that limits their usefulness to the NATO commander.63 In the campaign against the Islamic State, the few European countries that are conducting air strikes will do so only in Iraq even though the terrorist group is very active (and has its headquarters) in Syria. Lack of naval investment is also problematic. Jamie Shea, NATO’s Deputy Assistant Secretary General for Emerging Security Challenges, stated in May 2016 that a “lack of ships” is a growing problem for the alliance.64This lack of capability is mainly the result of a decrease in defense investment by the members of NATO since the end of the Cold War and a lack of political will to use military capability when and where it is needed.

Germany. In 2015, Germany announced plans to increase defense spending by 6.2 percent over five years.65 In 2016, its defense budget increased by €1.2 billion.66 The planned increase will raise the overall defense budget from €34.3 billion in 2016 to €39.2 billion by 2020.67 However, at 1.2 percent of GDP in 2015, German defense spending is still well below the NATO benchmark of 2 percent of GDP.68 Germany reportedly will focus increased defense euros “on cyber defense and naval capabilities as well as aerial surveillance.”69

The German military struggles with equipment that is in disrepair or short supply. In 2015, Germany spent only 13.3 percent of its defense budget on equipment,70 well below the 25 percent, 23.4 percent, and 26.1 percent spent by France, the U.K., and the U.S., respectively. The results of this underinvestment are evident. According to news descriptions of a Bundestag report, for example, only seven of 43 German naval helicopters are flightworthy, only one of four German submarines is operational, and only 70 of 80 GTK Boxer Armored Vehicles are fit for deployment.71

The air force faces similar challenges. In 2014, according to a parliamentary report, less than half of Germany’s fighter jets were ready for use,72 and in December 2015, a defense ministry report revealed that the situation had further deteriorated to the point where only 29 of 66 German Tornadoes were airworthy.73 Worse still, the Tornadoes currently flying surveillance missions over Iraq and Syria cannot “fly night missions because of a glare problem involving cockpit displays and pilots’ goggles.”74 Germany continues to utilize a 50-year-old transport plane because of a five-year delay in delivery of new Airbus A400M transports.75

In September 2015, the German government announced plans to phase out the army’s standard G36 rifle starting in 2019 after embarrassing reports that the G36 loses accuracy when sustaining fire in hot temperatures.76 Funding for equipment for the army, however, was increased by 8.4 percent in 2015.77

The German forces participating in a NATO training exercise in Norway substituted broomsticks for machine guns that they did not have.78 The units involved are assigned to the Spearhead force, which was created at the Wales summit as a key element in NATO’s response to Russian aggression against Ukraine.79 German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen has admitted that Germany is currently unable to meet NATO’s readiness targets.80 In an especially embarrassing episode, German soldiers taking part in the Cold Response 2016 exercise in Norway in February and March 2016 had to leave early after 12 days because they had exceeded their overtime limits.81

The German army, buoyed by conscription, was 585,000 strong in 1990 at the end of the Cold War.82 Today, the Bundeswehr has only 177,000 members.83 Germany will add 7,000 new positions by 2023.84 The decision marks the first time since the end of the Cold War that the German army has added troops to its ranks. Additionally, civilian personnel in the army will rise from the current 56,000 to 60,400, an addition of 4,400 civilians on top of the 7,000 increase in soldiers.85 In May 2016, the German Defense Minister announced that the government would seek parliamentary approval to remove the 185,000-person cap for the Bundeswehr.86

Germany will spend 240 million euros to keep dual-capable Tornado aircraft, an important piece of NATO’s nuclear deterrent, flying until 2024.87 However, it is also cutting procurement and decommissioning certain specific capabilities, a burden that will fall primarily on its army and air force. Germany has announced procurement of 18 Sea Lion-variant helicopters and 82 tactical transport helicopters from Airbus, reportedly to compensate for cancelled and reduced procurement elsewhere.88

At the United Nations in September 2014, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier called for greater German engagement in the world, but he focused principally on diplomatic rather than military engagement.89 Germany has supplied weapons to Kurdish troops fighting ISIS in Iraq, including rifles and MILAN anti-tank guided missiles and Panzerfaust 3 rockets.90 In 2016, it also increased the number of trainers it has on the ground in Iraq, but they are not allowed to engage in offensive operations.91

Overall, Germany has been increasing its military participation abroad. As of December 2015, 2,696 German soldiers were deployed overseas.92 Included in this number are contributions to NATO’s KFOR peacekeeping mission in Kosovo and NATO’s Operation Active Fence in Turkey.93 In early 2016, Germany also increased its troop contribution to NATO’s Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan to 980 soldiers, the second-largest contribution after the U.S.94 Germany participates in the EU Training Mission in Mali and in 2016 sent an additional 500 soldiers to support the U.N. Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali.95 Germany has elected not to participate in the air campaign to bomb ISIS targets, although in 2016 it did send six Tornadoes to fly reconnaissance missions over Iraq and Syria, as well as a frigate to assist in protecting the French aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle.96 From September 2015–January 2016, Germany contributed four Typhoons to Baltic Air Policing. It also has pledged 1,000 troops for the Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF), the spearhead force created after the NATO Wales summit.97

Despite increased engagement overseas, however, Germany has pushed back against NATO efforts to base troops and heavy weapons permanently in Eastern Europe.98 Germany is hemmed in by a largely historical legacy of public reluctance to support stronger military engagement beyond its borders. A Bertelsmann Foundation poll in April 2016 found that only 31 percent of Germans would support sending German troops to defend the Baltic States or Poland from Russian attack.99 As a result, German military contributions to NATO remain limited. Budget increases are still modest, and with much more time and money needed to build real defense capabilities, Germany will continue to be an economic powerhouse with mismatched military capabilities.

France. Although France rejoined NATO’s Integrated Command Structure in 2009, it remains outside the alliance’s nuclear planning group. France spent 1.8 percent of GDP on defense in 2015, spending a quarter of its defense budget on equipment (only Luxembourg, Poland, Turkey, and the U.S. spend a higher percentage on equipment).100 France had a defense budget of €31.4 billion in 2015; by 2019, the budget is expected to total €34 billion.101 While the country kept a NATO Wales summit commitment to protect defense from further budget cuts, its defense spending remains well below 2 percent of GDP. François Heisbourg has likened French defense spending under President Hollande and his predecessor Nicolas Sarkozy to “slow erosion, rather than severe cuts.”102

Despite this erosion, France maintains a competent, professional military with robust capabilities. France has a 209,000-strong active military force103 that includes 200 tanks; one aircraft carrier; 10 submarines, four of which are ballistic missile submarines; 202 combat aircraft; and 80 transport aircraft.104 France also remains politically and militarily dedicated to retaining an independent nuclear deterrent. Approximately one-fourth of France’s defense acquisition budget is spent on the nation’s nuclear deterrent.105 In February 2015, President Hollande reiterated the French commitment to maintaining this deterrent: “The international context does not allow for any weakness…. [T]he era of nuclear deterrence is therefore not over.”106

France withdrew the last of its troops in Afghanistan at the end of 2014, although all French combat troops had left in 2012. All told, France lost 89 soldiers and 700 wounded in Afghanistan.107 In September 2014, France launched Operation Chammal, its contribution to the air campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq. In February 2015, the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle joined the operation, halving the flying time needed for French fighters to strike targets in Iraq. Previously, all of France’s fighters had flown from bases in the United Arab Emirates or Jordan.108 The Charles de Gaulle left the Persian Gulf in April 2015 but returned to the eastern Mediterranean in late November 2015 to strike targets in Syria.109 In September 2015, a year after the commencement of Operation Chammal, France launched its first air strikes against targets in Syria.110

France has 1,000 soldiers,111 one frigate, eight Mirage and six Rafale fighter jets, one air-to-air refueling plane, one AWACS, and one maritime patrol aircraft,112 in addition to the approximately 26 aircraft on the Charles De Gaulle, involved in operations against ISIS.113 In December 2015, a French commander aboard the Charles de Gaulle took command of U.S. Naval Forces Central Command’s Task Force 50, overseeing naval strike operations against ISIS.114 It was the first time a French officer had ever commanded a U.S. Navy task force.115

The French military is also active in Africa, particularly in countries where France maintains cultural and historical ties. France has over 3,000 troops, 17 helicopters, 200 tanks, and six fighter jets involved in anti-terrorism operations in Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, and Niger as part of Operation Barkhane.116 In 2016, France will end Operation Sangaris in the Central African Republic (CAR), begun in 2013, but 300 of France’s 900 troops currently in the CAR will remain as part of the U.N. Peacekeeping mission and EU training mission there.117 France also continues to take part in the EU’s ATALANTA anti-piracy mission off the coast of Somalia and its own anti-piracy mission in the Gulf of Guinea118 in addition to a host of smaller U.N. and EU peacekeeping and training missions in Africa and Lebanon.119

The French economy continues to sputter along, growing by 0.5 percent in the first quarter of 2016;120 an enormous debt hampers an economy in need of structural reforms. Many analysts believe that under the current reality, “it is unlikely that France will be able to return to sustained economic growth and thus broaden its budget base.”121 The lagging economy has put further pressure on investments in defense. However, in November, in the wake of terrorist attacks in Paris, President Hollande announced that planned cuts in defense personnel will be deferred through 2019.122

The political and economic importance of the defense industry in France impedes deep defense cuts but does not prevent them altogether. The defense industry is so important, both in terms of cash flow to France’s coffers and to its prestige as a significant supplier of arms and advanced equipment, that the government waited months following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to suspend indefinitely its delivery to Russia of two Mistral warships. The sale was finally cancelled in August 2015,123 and France sold the mistrals to Egypt.124 (The Egyptian navy is slated to take delivery of the mistrals by September 2016,125 and France is reported to have paid Russia $1.1 billion for cancellation of the sale.126) In February 2015, France signed a deal with Egypt to export 24 Rafale fighter jets, the first foreign order for the planes.127 In March 2016, Qatar and France signed a $7.5 billion deal for 24 Rafale jets and an undisclosed number of MBDA missiles, including training for 36 pilots and 100 mechanics.128 In April 2016, the French group DCNS won a contract from Australia to build 12 submarines worth an estimated €34 billion.129 According to the French defense industry group GIFAS, orders were 2.3 percent higher in 2015 than in 2014.130

The United Kingdom. America’s most important bilateral relationship in Europe is the Special Relationship with the United Kingdom. Culturally, both countries value liberal democracy, a free-market economy, and human rights at a time when many other nations around the world are rejecting those values. The U.S. and the U.K. also face the same global security challenges: a resurgent Russia, the rise of the Islamic State, increasing cyber attacks, and nuclear proliferation in Iran.

In his famous 1946 “Sinews of Peace” speech—now better known as his “Iron Curtain” speech—Winston Churchill described the Anglo–American relationship as one that is based, first and foremost, on defense and military cooperation. From the sharing of intelligence to the transfer of nuclear technology, a high degree of military cooperation has helped to make the Special Relationship between the U.S. and the U.K. unique. Then-U.K. Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher made clear the essence of the Special Relationship between the U.K. and the U.S. when she first met then-U.S.S.R. President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1984: “I am an ally of the United States. We believe the same things, we believe passionately in the same battle of ideas, we will defend them to the hilt. Never try to separate me from them.”131

Since the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the United Kingdom has proven itself to be America’s number one military partner. For example, Britain provided 46,000 troops for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. At the height of this commitment, the U.K. also deployed 10,000 troops to one of the deadliest parts of Afghanistan—an area that at its peak accounted for 20 percent of the country’s total violence—while many other NATO allies operated in the relative safety of the North.

In 2015, the U.K. conducted a defense review, the results of which have driven a modest increase in defense spending and an effort to reverse some of the cuts that had been implemented pursuant to the previous review in 2010. Though its military is small in comparison to the militaries of France and Germany, the U.K. maintains the most effective armed forces in European NATO. In recent years, it has increased funding for its highly respected Special Forces. By 2020, the Royal Air Force (RAF) will operate a fleet of F-35 and Typhoon fighter aircraft, the latter being upgraded to carry out ground attacks. The RAF recently brought into service a new fleet of air-to-air refuelers, which is particularly noteworthy because of the severe shortage of this capability in Europe. With the U.K., the U.S. produced and has jointly operated an intelligence-gathering platform, the RC-135 Rivet Joint aircraft, which has already seen service in Mali, Nigeria, and Iraq and is now part of the RAF fleet.

The U.K. operates seven C-17 cargo planes and has started to bring the European A400M cargo aircraft into service after years of delays. The 2015 defense review recommended keeping 14 C-130Js in service even though they initially were going to be removed from the force structure. The Sentinel R1, an airborne battlefield and ground surveillance aircraft, originally was due to be removed from the force structure in 2015, but its service is being extended to at least 2025, and the U.K. will soon start operating the P-8 Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft. The U.S. and U.K. are in discussions with regard to filling the U.K.’s antisubmarine gap until the new P-8s come into service in 2019.132 In November 2015, a French maritime patrol aircraft had to assist the Royal Navy in searching for a Russian submarine off the coast of Scotland.133

The Royal Navy’s surface fleet is based on the new Type-45 Destroyer and the older Type-23 Frigate. The latter will be replaced by the Type-26 Global Combat Ship sometime in the 2020s. In total, the U.K. operates only 19 frigates and destroyers, which most experts agree is dangerously low for the commitment asked of the Royal Navy. Nevertheless, the Royal Navy still delivers a formidable capability.

The U.K. will not have an aircraft carrier in service until around 2020 when the first Queen Elizabeth-class carrier enters service. This will be the largest carrier operated in Europe. Two of her class will be built, and both will enter service. Additionally, the Royal Navy is introducing seven Astute-class attack submarines as it phases out its older Trafalgar-class. Crucially, the U.K. maintains a fleet of 13 Mine Counter Measure Vessels (MCMVs) that deliver world-leading capability and play an important role in Persian Gulf security contingency planning.

Perhaps the Royal Navy’s most important contribution is its continuous-at-sea, submarine-based nuclear deterrent based on the Vanguard-class ballistic missile submarine and the Trident missile. In July 2016, the House of Commons voted to renew Trident, approving the manufacture of four replacement submarines. However, the replacement submarines are not expected to enter service until 2028 at the earliest.134

Turkey. Turkey has been an important U.S. ally since the closing days of World War II. During the Korean War, it deployed a total of 15,000 troops and suffered 721 killed in action and more than 2,000 wounded. Turkey joined NATO in 1952, one of only two NATO members (the other was Norway) that had a land border with the Soviet Union. Today, it continues to play an active role in the alliance, but not without challenges. A significant low point in U.S.–Turkish relations came in 2003 when the Turkish parliament voted by a small margin (264 to 250) to deny the U.S. access to its territory for an invasion of Iraq. Under the leadership of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey has been a challenging partner for the West, but it remains an important partner and NATO member.

Turkey is vitally important to Europe’s energy security. It is the gateway to the resource-rich Caucasus and Caspian Basin and controls the Bosporus, one of the most important shipping straits in the world. Several major gas and oil pipelines run through Turkey. As new oilfields are developed in the Central Asian states, and given Europe’s dependence on Russian oil and gas, Turkey can be expected to play an increasingly important role in Europe’s energy security.

On July 15, 2016, elements of the Turkish armed forces attempted a coup d’état against the increasingly Islamist-leaning leadership of President Erdogan. This was the fourth coup since 1960 (the fifth if one counts the so-called post-modern coup in 1997). In each previous case, the military had been successful, and democracy was returned to the people; in this case, however, Erdogan immediately enforced a state of emergency and cracked down on many aspects of government, the military, and civil society. Tens of thousands of civil servants, judges, and academics have been arrested, dismissed, or banned from international travel. Approximately one-third of all general officers in the Turkish military have been dismissed. Although all opposition parties condemned the coup attempt, the failed plot has enabled Erdogan to consolidate more power. His response to the coup has further eroded Turkey’s democracy, once considered a model for the region. Senior government officials’ erratic and at times hyperbolic statements alleging U.S. involvement in the coup, combined with Erdogan’s rapprochement with Russian President Vladimir Putin, have brought U.S.–Turkish relations to an all-time low.

Notwithstanding the fallout from the coup, U.S. security interests in the region lend considerable importance to America’s relationship with Turkey . Turkey is home to Incirlik Air Base, a major U.S. and NATO air base. After an initial period of vacillation in dealing with the threat from the Islamic State, a spate of ISIS attacks that rocked the country has led Turkey to play a bigger role in attacking the terrorist group, and Turkey’s military contribution to international security operations still sets it apart from many of the nations of Western Europe. The Turks have deployed thousands of troops to Afghanistan and have commanded the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) twice since 2002. Turkey continues to maintain more than 500 troops in Afghanistan as part of NATO’s Resolute Support mission, making it the fifth-largest troop contributor out of 40 nations. The Turks also have contributed to a number of peacekeeping missions in the Balkans, still maintain almost 400 troops in Kosovo, and have participated in counterpiracy and counterterrorism missions off the Horn of Africa. They also deployed planes, frigates, and submarines during the NATO-led operation in Libya.

Turkey’s 510,600-strong active-duty military is NATO’s second-largest after that of the United States. A number of major procurement programs in the works include up to 250 new Altay main battle tanks, 350 T-155 Fırtına 155mm self-propelled howitzers, six Type-214 submarines, and more than 50 T-129 attack helicopters.135

With respect to procurement, the biggest area of contention between Turkey and NATO is Turkey’s selection of a missile defense system. In September 2013, Turkey selected China Precision Machinery Import–Export Corporation (CPMIEC) for a $3.44 billion deal to provide the system. NATO has said that no Chinese-built system could be integrated into any NATO or American missile defense system. U.S. officials also have warned that any Turkish company that acts as a local subcontractor in the program would face serious U.S. sanctions because CPMIEC has been sanctioned under the Iran, North Korea, and Syria Nonproliferation Act.136 After increased pressure from NATO allies, Ankara opened parallel talks with Eurosam, the European maker of the Aster 30, and Raytheon/Lockheed Martin, the U.S. company offering the Patriot system. As of October 9, 2015, a final decision had not been made.

The challenge for U.S. and NATO policymakers will be to determine whether the aftermath of the coup represents a long-term shift in Turkey’s foreign policy or whether Erdogan’s leadership of Turkey is simply an anomaly in an otherwise constructive and fruitful security relationship that has lasted for decades.

The Baltic States. The U.S. has a long history of championing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Baltic States that dates back to the interwar period of the 1920s. Since regaining their independence from Russia in the early 1990s, the Baltic States have been staunch supporters of the transatlantic relationship. Although small in absolute terms, the three countries contribute significantly to NATO in relative terms.

Estonia. Estonia has been a leader in the Baltics in terms of defense spending and is one of five NATO members to meet the 2 percent of GDP spending benchmark.137 Although the Estonian armed forces total only 5,750 active duty service personnel (including the army, navy, and air force),138 they are held in high regard by their NATO partners and punch well above their weight inside the alliance. Since 1996, almost 1,500 Estonian soldiers have served in the Balkans. Between 2003 and 2011, 455 served in Iraq. Perhaps Estonia’s most impressive deployment has been to Afghanistan: more than 2,000 troops deployed between 2003 and 2014 and the second-highest number of deaths per capita among all 28 NATO members. In 2015, Estonia reintroduced conscription for men ages 18–27, who must serve eight or 11 months before being added to the reserve rolls.139

Estonia has demonstrated that it takes defense and security policy seriously, focusing its defense policy on improving defensive capabilities at home while maintaining the ability to be a strategic actor abroad. Over the next few years, Estonia will increase from one to two the number of brigades in the order of battle. The goal is to see 50 percent of all land forces with the capability to deploy beyond national borders. Mindful of NATO’s benchmark that each member should spend 2 percent of GDP on defense, there is a planning assumption inside the Estonian Ministry of Defense that up to 10 percent of the armed forces will always be deployed overseas. Estonia is also making efforts to increase the size of its rapid reaction reserve force from 18,000 to 21,000 troops by 2022. This increase and modernization includes the recently created Cyber Defence League, a reserve force that relies heavily on expertise found in the civilian sector.

Latvia. Latvia’s recent military experience has also been centered on operations in Iraq and Afghanistan alongside NATO and U.S. forces. Latvia has deployed more than 3,000 troops to Afghanistan, and between 2003 and 2008, it deployed 1,165 troops to Iraq. In addition, Latvia has contributed to a number of other international peacekeeping and military missions. These are significant numbers considering that only 5,310 of Latvia’s troops are full-time servicemembers; the remainder are reserves.140

Latvia’s 2012 Defense Concept is an ambitious document that charts a path to a bright future for the Latvian National Armed Forces if followed closely and resourced properly. Latvia plans that a minimum of 8 percent of its professional armed forces will be deployed at any one time but will train to ensure that no less than 50 percent will be combat-ready to deploy overseas if required. The government has stated that the NATO benchmark of 2 percent of GDP in defense spending will be met by 2018,141 and spending will be increasing steadily until then. Each year, no less than 20 percent of the Latvian defense budget will be allocated to modernizing and procuring new military equipment. Latvian Special Forces are well respected by their American counterparts. Latvia has continued to upgrade its ground-based air defense system, ordering seven new Sentinel radars from the U.S. in 2015.142

Lithuania. Lithuania is the largest of the three Baltic States, and its armed forces total 16,400 active duty troops, an increase of 50 percent from the previous year.143 Lithuania has also shown steadfast commitment to international peacekeeping and military operations. Between 1994 and 2010, more than 1,700 Lithuanian troops were deployed to the Balkans as part of NATO missions in Bosnia, Croatia, and Kosovo. Between 2003 and 2011, Lithuania sent 930 troops to Iraq. Since 2002, just under 3,000 Lithuanian troops have served in Afghanistan, a notable contribution divided between a special operations mission alongside U.S. and Latvian Special Forces and command of a Provisional Reconstruction Team (PRT) in Ghor Province, making Lithuania one of only a handful of NATO members to have commanded a PRT.

Although Lithuania does not meet the NATO goal of 2 percent of GDP spent on defense, like Latvia, it has pledged to do so by 2018.144 In 2017, Lithuania plans to spend €725 million on defense, approximately 1.8 percent of GDP.145 In addition, Lithuania’s decision to build a liquefied natural gas import facility at Klaipėda has begun to pay dividends, breaking Russia’s natural gas monopoly in the region. In 2016, Norway will overtake Russia as the top exporter of natural gas to Lithuania.146

Poland. Situated in the center of Europe, Poland shares a border with four NATO allies, a long border with Belarus and Ukraine, and a 144-mile border with Russia alongside the Kaliningrad Oblast. Poland also has a 65-mile border with Lithuania, making it the only NATO member state that borders any of the Baltic States, and NATO’s contingency plans for liberating the Baltic States in the event of a Russian invasion are reported to rely heavily on Polish troops and ports.147 Poland has an active military force of almost 100,000,148 including a 48,000-strong army with 971 main battle tanks.149 Poland’s Defense Minister has declared that “we envisage a fundamental increase in the army, by at least 50 percent over the coming years, including the creation of three brigades for the territorial defense of the country on the eastern flank.”150

While Poland’s main focus is territorial defense, the country has 198 troops deployed in Afghanistan as part of NATO’s Resolute Support Mission.151 Additionally, Poland has discussed the possibility of sending F-16s to Syria to fly reconnaissance missions.152 Poland’s air force has taken part in Baltic Air Policing six times since 2006 and most recently in the first half of 2015. In April 2016, Poland and the remaining three Visigrád Group nations announced plans, starting in 2017, to begin rotating units of 150 soldiers to the Baltics for three months.153

Current U.S. Military Presence in Europe
Former head of U.S. European Command General Philip Breedlove has aptly described the role of U.S. basing in Europe:

The mature network of U.S. operated bases in the EUCOM AOR provides superb training and power projection facilities in support of steady state operations and contingencies in Europe, Eurasia, Africa, and the Middle East. This footprint is essential to TRANSCOM’s global distribution mission and also provides critical basing support for intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets flying sorties in support of AFRICOM, CENTCOM, EUCOM, U.S. Special Operations Command, and NATO operations.154


Read more : http://index.heritage.org/military/2017/assessments/operating-environment/e…

Revenir en haut

MessagePosté le: Mar 13 Juin - 04:29 (2017)    Sujet du message: Publicité

PublicitéSupprimer les publicités ?
Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 13 Juin - 04:33 (2017)    Sujet du message: TURKEY AND PAKISTAN DEPLOYMENT TO QATAR Répondre en citant


...Turkey has approved deployment of 3,000 Army Troops to Qatar immediately, with another 10,000 troops to follow.

Pakistan has approved deployment of 20,000 Army troops to Qatar immediately, 2,000 arrived today...


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 15:07 (2017)    Sujet du message: UTAH SHERIFF TO BLM: “I WILL DEPUTIZE EVERY MAN, WOMAN AND CHILD” TO STOP FEDERAL AGENTS” Répondre en citant


Written by: Tim Brown
Published on: March 24, 2016

A Utah sheriff has put out the word that he will not allow his county to be overrun by the unconstitutional Bureau of Land Management and the US Forest Service, and has gone so far as to warn the BLM that he will “deputize everyone and arrest all federal agents” should they enter his county in a similar manner to that of those in Nevada and Oregon.

Sheriff Marty Gleave has been serving the county he is in as sheriff for nearly 25 years. According to Gleave, all he has seen is that things “get progressively worse and worse and worse with the so-called land police.”

Gleave serves Piute County, which is the second smallest county by population in Utah. However, following the protests in Oregon, the arrests of many protesters at Bundy Ranch, including Cliven Bundy and the murder of LaVoy Finicum, Gleave addressed the Rural Caucus of the Utah State legislature on February 12, 2016.

At the center of a conflict in dispute between Sheriff Gleave and the US Forest Service is Gleave’s uncle Stanton Gleave, a longtime rancher in the county.

“You know, we’ve got FBI, DEA, ATF and ICE,” Sheriff Gleave said. “We’ve always been able to work with them people because they would only come and do major felony cases and different things like that. So, they were always out of the way until we needed them.”

However, he then singled out the BLM for what they have been involved in.

“We’ve got a Bureau of Land Management police and Forest Service police who are out doing the same exact jobs that my deputies can do and every other deputy sheriff and sheriff can do,” Gleave added.

Sheriff Gleave went on to elaborate about some of those things that could be handled by the sheriffs and their deputies. Even though I disagree that those things should not be handled by any sheriff, police or federal agent, I’ll leave that aside not to distract from his point.
Gleave referred to the feds, particularly the Forest Service and BLM, as “mismanagement” of their pretended authority. Take a listen to some of the many examples that Sheriff Gleave presents that the feds have caused problems for the wildlife and for the people, then failed to follow up on.

Utah Sheriff Marty Gleave talks BLM Forest Service Over Reach 2016

VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oWqQeCs-D2M

The Utah Sheriff also made a point in the video that men can abuse their authority and used himself as an example to demonstrate that if he wanted to abuse the authority entrusted to him by the people, he could have people in jail every day. However, he knows that would be wrong and lawless.

Gleave said that he was not a fan of the militia showing up in his county because he had a militia, the people. The sheriff even pointed them out. Good for him, and good for them!

“We’re not taking no more cuts on the Mountain. I’ll deputize every man, woman and child in the county to stop what’s going on,” Sheriff Gleave concluded.

Friends, this is what is needed, constitutional sheriffs. Furthermore, presidential candidates don’t just need to be held to the status quo. They need to be asked if they will seek the dismantling of the unconstitutional agencies like the BLM, the Forest Service, the ATF, the DEA, the Department of Education and Homeland Security. The heads of these organizations don’t answer to the people. They are appointed bureaucrats who infringe on the rights of the people and violate the US Constitution.

Until we are ready to eliminate and decentralize the Beast, we don’t need to complain about it. The Beast has shed its chains and has showed us its true form. The People must either restrain it, which is unlikely, or kill it. There is no other solution.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 16:25 (2017)    Sujet du message: PUTIN APPROVES SIGNING SCO CONVENTION ON COUNTERING EXTREMISM Répondre en citant


© REUTERS/ Dmitri Lovetsky/Pool
16:35 14.06.2017

According to published decree, Vladimir Putin issued a presidential order approving the signing of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization's Convention on Combating Extremism.

© Sputnik/ Mihail Metzel/POOL
Putin Predicts SCO Gaining More Influence as India, Pakistan Join Bloc

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Russian President Vladimir Putin issued a presidential order approving the signing of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization's (SCO) Convention on Combating Extremism, a relevant decree was published on the government's legal information portal on Wednesday.

"To accept the offer of the government of the Russian Federation to sign the Shanghai Cooperation Organization Convention on Combating Extremism… To consider it appropriate to sign the Convention, provided for by the present order, at the meeting of the Council of the Heads of the SCO Member States," the decree said.

According to the order, the Russian Interior Ministry may introduce amendments to the draft document, ratified by the Russian government, if it is not of fundamental importance, during the negotiations on the signing of the Convention.

The SCO is a political, military and economic alliance comprising Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. The organization kicked off its two-day summit on Thursday in the Kazakh capital of Astana. During the summit, member countries signed a document on the accession of India and Pakistan to the SCO.

The Convention on Combating Extremism, signed at the Astana summit, stipulates cooperation in fighting terrorism, including collaboration between member countries' special services. It was emphasized that such anti-extremist initiatives are highly important in the wake of the growing threat of international terrorism and terrorist organizations operating in SCO countries.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 16:30 (2017)    Sujet du message: INDIAN NAVAL SHIPS SAIL INTO AUSTRALIAN WATERS FOR BILATERAL DRILLS Répondre en citant


© AP Photo/ Aaron Favila

Asia & Pacific
15:27 14.06.2017

A month after rejecting Canberra’s request for participating in the Malabar exercise, three Indian naval ships arrived at Australian port Fremantle for the week-long bilateral exercise AUSINDEX-17. This would be the second edition of the exercise after the first in 2015 at Visakhapatnam.

© Photo: U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Ryan J. Batchelder
India, Singapore Begin Advanced Marine Drill in South China Sea

New Delhi (Sputnik) – The three ships — INS Kamorta, INS Shivalik and INS Jyoti — will participate in the exercise aimed “to increase interoperability and forge strong bonds of friendship across the seas.” Kamorta is an anti-submarine stealth corvette, Shivalik is a stealth multi-role frigate and Jyoti is a replenishment oiler.

“In addition, as part of the Indian Government’s vision of SAGAR (Security and Growth for All in the Region), the Indian Navy has also been involved in assisting countries in the Indian Ocean Region with exclusive economic zone surveillance, search and rescue, and other capacity-building and capability-enhancement activities,” the Indian Navy said in a statement.

The joint naval drill has special importance for the two countries as India rejected an Australian request to participate in the India-led Malabar naval exercise this year. The naval forces of India, the US and Japan hold the exercise in the Indian Ocean but it is anticipated that the countries declined the Australian request out of fear of antagonizing China.

“AUSINDEX is a terrific opportunity to increase our interoperability and enhance the professional interaction of two great navies. Australian and India share a commitment to a stable and prosperous Indian Ocean region,” Australian Fleet Commander, Rear Admiral Stuart Mayer, said.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 16:40 (2017)    Sujet du message: IRAN SENDS ITS WARSHIPS TO THE GULF OF ADEN, HERE'S WHY Répondre en citant


© AP Photo/ Fars News Agency, Mahdi Marizad
Middle East
10:31 14.06.2017(updated 10:50 14.06.2017)

On Sunday, Iran's 47th Navy flotilla, comprised of Alborz destroyer and Bushehr logistic warship, set sail on its voyage to Oman. It will further go to the north of the Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden. Sputnik Persian talked to Iranian political analysts, who explained why Tehran is demonstrating its naval military might.

© AFP 2017/ STR
Iran Dispatches Warships to Oman Amid ‘Controlled Insecurity’ in the Gulf

On June 11, the naval fleet left the southern Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas for Oman after a ceremony attended by Iran's Navy commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari. The move, which comes amid a crisis in the Persian Gulf after Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Egypt cut ties with Qatar for allegedly supporting "extremism," has sparked heated reaction of the Gulf of Aden littoral states.

Iran's news agency Tasnim News reported that the Gulf of Aden littoral states were making deliberate attempts to disrupt the presence of Iranian naval flotillas in high seas.
"Today, the Gulf of Aden littoral states have joined hands to prevent our naval flotillas from docking in there with the purpose of indirectly blocking our presence in high seas and international waters,” it quoted Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari as saying in the ceremony marking the start of the 47th Navy flotilla’s mission.

Iran’s Navy, nevertheless, pays no attention to such hostile attempts and will keep a mighty presence in international waters, the commander added.

Sayyari also made it clear that Iranian flotillas pursue two main objectives in their overseas missions: ensuring security of shipping routes and foiling Iranophobia attempts.

© AFP 2017/ STR
Iran's Plan for Nuclear Powered Navy is Response to 'US Violating the Deal'

The 47th flotilla is set to replace its counterpart, number 46, made up of a Sabalan destroyer and Lavan logistic warship, which returned to Iran on Sunday after completing a two-month mission to secure naval routes and protect merchant vessels and oil tankers in the Gulf of Aden. The Gulf of Aden, which lies between the Horn of Africa and the southern tip of the Arabian Peninsula, is home to multiple security threats. The ongoing conflict in Yemen between the Saudi-backed government and the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels has led to a number of ships in the area coming under attack.

Meanwhile, pirates in Somalia have been taking advantage of the chaos to launch raids on merchant vessels passing through the area, one of the busiest shipping routes for oil in the world.

Hence, Iran’s Navy has increased its presence in international waters in recent years, conducting patrols in the Gulf of Aden since November 2008, safeguarding merchant containers and oil tankers owned or leased by Iran or other countries.

Sputnik Persian discussed the issue with Iranian political analysts, who noted that the Iranian warships pose no threat to its neighbors. They reiterated that the planned mission is aimed at repelling attacks of the pirates and guaranteeing the safety of merchant ships.

"Iran regards it as its duty to preserve safety of the regional countries, especially in the joint water basin, hence we should not interconnect these maneuvers with any external factors, and with the Qatari crisis in particular," Hossein Ruyvaran, Iranian political analyst, an expert on the Middle East and the Arab world who teaches at the University of Tehran and former director of Iran's regional state TV station in Beirut told Sputnik.

Iran Sends 41st Naval Flotilla on Anti-Pirate Patrol Mission to Gulf of Aden

"This is a friendly visit of Iranian warships, which has been coordinated with Oman beforehand. It is aimed purely at safeguarding of the healthy climate of the merchant shipping in international waters, where sea pirates are especially active," he said. "Thus Iran, alongside other countries, is actively present in these waters and regards it as its international duty to defend this area and safeguard it for other countries, using its military might. The mission of the 47th naval flotilla is by no means interconnected with any external factors and developments in the region, including the Qatari crisis," the political analyst reiterated.

Another Iranian political analyst, member of the Scientific Research Center for International Relations in Tehran, Dr. Mani Mehrabi, noted that the maneuvers of the Iranian warships, which pose no threat to Iran's neighbors, mistakenly raise suspicions and concerns of the regional countries due to increased tensions in the region and recent terror attacks in Iran.

"Iran sends its missions to the high seas and the Gulf of Aden in particular, on a systematic and constant basis. By demonstrating such military might, Iran is sending a peaceful message to its neighbors, who could use this military mission for their own benefits," the political analyst told Sputnik.

The major aims pursued by his home country, the expert said, are to safeguard the merchant ships and oil tankers and to practice certain tactics during its training missions. Any confrontation with the vessels of the neighboring countries is not on the agenda of the 47th Navy flotilla. However the ongoing crisis in the region and increased tensions amid recent terrorist attacks in Iran have prompted the Arab countries to mistakenly regard any military maneuvers of Iran's Navy as a potential threat of an attack, the expert concluded.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 16:46 (2017)    Sujet du message: MACEDONIAN FOREIGN MINISTER CALLS JOINING EU, NATO COUNTRY'S 'POLICY PRIORITY' Répondre en citant


© AP Photo/ Boris Grdanoski

17:23 14.06.2017

Macedonian Foreign Minister stated that countries accession to the European Union and NATO is the main priority.

© AP Photo/ Boris Grdanoski
What's in a Name? Macedonia Ready to Lose Its Identity to Join NATO

ATHENS (Sputnik) – Macedonia's accession to both the European Union and NATO is the main priority within the country's foreign policy, Macedonia's newly appointed Foreign Minister Nikola Dimitrov said Wednesday, adding that such a move will improve the situation in the Balkan region.

"We went through difficult years to get independence, and we are fully committed to develop relations with the European Union. Regarding our foreign policy priorities, we have a priority to join the EU and NATO… The beginning of talks on our country's accession to the European Union will benefit all sides. I am sure that you [Greece] have the leverage that may open the way for us," Dimitrov told reporters after a meeting with Greek Foreign Minister Nikos Kotzias in Athens.

According to Dimitrov, it is necessary to resolve the dispute with Greece over Macedonia's official name in order to make the Balkan region stable.

Skopje and Athens are involved in an ongoing dispute over the name of the Republic of Macedonia. Greece regards "Macedonia" as a term referring only to the region in its terrorist and to the ancient Kingdom of Macedonia. Athens therefore insists that Skopje use FYROM (former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia) as its official name, as is done by the United Nations. Due to this grievance, Greece has being blocking Macedonia's accession to the European Union since 2005 and to NATO since 2008.

On June 8, Macedonian Prime Minister Zoran Zaev said he was ready to join NATO using the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia as a temporary name in order to promote negotiations over the process of country's integration into the European Union.

In response, the Greek foreign minister said that the sides should reach a compromise solution for the dispute.

"Greece would like our neighboring country to become a part of Euro-Atlantic system. But we should follow the path of mutual understanding and compromise… As soon as a compromise solution regarding the name is found, we will go to the United Nations and sign a new agreement, and then we will go to Brussels to confirm it," Kotzias said.

Macedonia joined NATO's Partnership for Peace in 1995 and the Membership Action Plan in 1999, which is a program that offers advice, assistance and support to countries seeking to join the alliance.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 14 Juin - 17:11 (2017)    Sujet du message: BOEING TO CUT 50 EXECUTIVES, REORGANIZE DEFENSE BUSINESS Répondre en citant


  •   By Marcus Weisgerber
June 13, 2017
Photo via Boeing

Fresh off a move to from St. Louis to Washington, the firm’s defense division says it’s removing a layer of bureaucracy.

Aerospace giant Boeing will reorganize its defense and space business, eliminating dozens of executive billets and creating new business units for fighter jets, drones, space and helicopters.

Leanne Caret, CEO of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, announced the move Tuesday afternoon. She said the changes would allow quicker decisions and better position the company to win business.

“We need to be an agile organization that is more responsive to customers’ needs and committed to continually improving productivity,” she said in a statement.

Caret is expected to provide more details about the reorganization in a live interview at the Defense One Global Business Briefing on Wednesday morning, in Washington, D.C.

The big question is “Why now?” said Byron Callan, an analyst with Capital Alpha Partners, who said it would be tough to pinpoint a specific bid that the company lost that might have spurred the reorganization. “My candidates would be either it’s classified or…the bomber loss is something that has resonated within the organization and they feel that they maybe need some tighter attention to stuff.”

The organizational overhaul is effective July 1 and affects about 50 executive positions. It’s unclear what will happen to those employees, who were notified of the moves on Tuesday, ahead of the public announcement.

RELATED: The Future of Boeing Defense, According to Its New CEO
RELATED: Boeing to Move Defense Headquarters from St. Louis to DC
RELATED: Boeing, Shipbuilder Team Up to Build Giant Underwater Drones

“Currently, there are on average seven layers of management between a shop-floor technician and Leanne Caret,” said Todd Blecher, a spokesman for Boeing’s defense business. “Effective July 1 there will be no more than six. An entire layer of executives, mostly between program managers and division presidents, is being eliminated.”

The firm will also disband two of its four units: Boeing Military Aircraft and Network & Space Systems. Their efforts will be pursued in four smaller segments:
  • Autonomous Systems, headed by Chris Raymond, will include drone-makers Insitu and Liquid Robotics. It will also handle the Echo Voyager sub drone; vertical lift unmanned systems; and “certain electronic and information systems.” 
  • Space and Missile Systems, to be run by Jim Chilton, will handle Boeing’s satellites, the company’s share of United Launch Alliance; International Space Station work; Ground-based Midcourse Defense missile interceptors; the firm’s pursuit of the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (new ICBMs); and various weapons including the Joint Direct Attack Munition and Harpoon missile. 
  • Strike, Surveillance and Mobility, to be led by Shelley Lavender, will be in charge of Boeing’s signature aircraft programs: F-15 and F/A-18 fighters; P-8 maritime patrol aircraft; and modifications and upgrades to fixed-wing aircraft. The unit will also run the company’s pursuit of a new Joint Surveillance Target Attack Radar System for the U.S. Air Force.
  • Vertical Lift, under David Koopersmith, will build the AH-6i, AH-64 Apache, and CH-47 Chinook helicopters; and the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor, which Boeing builds jointly with Bell Helicopter.
The company’s Development, Global Operations, and Phantom Works segments “will largely be unchanged,” the company said in a statement.

The creation of the Autonomous Systems sector could be seen as a way to better incorporate Insitu into Boeing and better position itself for future drone business.

The reorganization is Caret’s latest move since she took the helm of the firm’s defense unit in February 2016. Later that year, After several months of debate, Caret moved Boeing’s defense headquarters from St. Louis to Arlington, Virginia, within eyeshot of the Pentagon and U.S. Capitol, so she and other executives could have more face time with military and political leaders.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Jeu 15 Juin - 09:59 (2017)    Sujet du message: FLEET DESIGN, NATIONAL SECURITY FOCUSES OF NAVAL WAR COLLEGE FORUM Répondre en citant


Story Number: NNS170614-11Release Date: 6/14/2017 3:37:00 PM   

By Daniel L. Kuester, U.S. Naval War College Public Affairs

170613-N-RX668-220 NEWPORT, R.I. (June 13, 2017) Thomas G. Mahnken, left, from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, Craig L. Symonds from the U.S. Naval Academy, Paul Kennedy from Yale University and Graham Allison from Harvard Kennedy School participate in a panel discussion during the 68th Annual Current Strategy Forum at U.S. Naval War College (NWC) in Newport, R.I. The two-day forum brings together distinguished guests and students to explore issues of strategic national importance. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jess Lewis/Released)

NEWPORT, R.I. (NNS) -- U.S. Naval War College (NWC) Newport, Rhode Island hosted the 68th Current Strategy Forum (CSF) this week bringing together national security experts from the military, academics, government and private industry to explore wide-ranging issues of national and international importance.

CSF is the annual Capstone event for the NWC academic year and this year's theme, "National Security and Fleet Design" focused on the classic strategic problems of balancing ends, ways and means in constructing the Fleet.

The two-day forum, hosted by the Rear Adm. Jeffrey Harley, president, NWC, brought together civilian and military leaders to discuss the future strategy of the United States.

The decades-old event remains important for decision makers who want to understand the national security strategic environment.

"The objective of CSF, which dates back to 1949, is to bring leading thinkers to the college to share their perspectives on a topic of strategic importance," said Michael Sherlock, professor in Academic Affairs and organizer of the event. "To add a broader and more diverse perspective to the audience, we reach out to the private sector and the community, leaders from business, academia, state and local government and invite them to join our students and share ideas on a variety of topics related to national security."

Naval War College students were the focal point of much of the discussion and were told be open to differing ideas.

"Learn to consider other perspectives," said Harley in his welcome remarks. "Listen to alternative views. Be curious and ask questions. Engage in the discussion. This is what will make you a better decision maker and problem solver, and our nation needs both."

Harley kicked off the event with welcome remarks and introduced keynote speaker Honorable John Lehman Jr., secretary of the Navy from 1981-87, who spoke on the importance of the college in resolving conflict from the Cold War through the present.

The changing world presents many challenges for the students, according to Harley. "The challenges are many. America and her allies must wrestle with on-going conflicts in the Greater Middle East, with fighting occurring daily throughout the region, from Syria to Afghanistan," he said. "The problems posed by terrorism, irregular warfare, and the use of weapons of mass destruction remain in the headlines, and will continue to shape the character of many struggles around the globe."

Additional keynote speakers over the two days were Adm. John Richardson, chief of naval operations; Gen. Robert Neller, commandant, U.S. Marine Corps; Michael Austin, American Enterprise Institute; Harlan Ullman, Atlantic Council; and Robert Kaplan, Center for a New American Security.

Three panel discussions, "Enduring Strategic Principles and Present Day Challenges," "National Security and the Maritime Force," and "Future Challenges and Ways Ahead," were also held over the course of the forum.

NWC is a one-year resident program that graduates about 600 resident students and about 1,000 distance learning students each year. Its primary mission is to educate and develop future leaders. Additional missions include: helping to define the future Navy and its roles and missions, supporting combat readiness, strengthening global maritime partnerships, promoting ethics and leadership throughout the force, contributing knowledge to shape effective decisions through our Maritime History Center, providing expertise and advice to the international legal community through the Stockton Center for the Study of International Law. Students earn Joint Professional Military Education (JPME) credit and either a diploma or a master's degree in National Security and Strategic Studies or Defense and Strategic Studies. Established in 1884, U.S. Naval War College is the oldest institution of its kind in the world. More than 50,000 students have graduated since its first class of nine students in 1885 and about 300 of today's active duty admirals, generals and senior executive service leaders are alumni.

For more information, visit http://www.navy.mil, http://www.facebook.com/usnavy, or http://www.twitter.com/usnavy.

For more news from Naval War College, visit http://www.navy.mil/local/nwc/.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698




VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-prK5UcGY4


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kNusm4RzsA


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T05DTlZrQY0

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Ven 16 Juin - 03:05 (2017)    Sujet du message: AT BALTOPS, IT’S BACK TO PREPPING FOR HIGH-END WARFARE Répondre en citant


June 14, 2017
LPhot Luron Wright/Crown Copyright via U.S. Navy

The annual NATO exercise in tight Baltic waters, grown a bit sleepy after the Cold War, has snapped back into serious intensity.

ABOARD THE ROALD AMUNDSEN – The small boat with the big twin outboard motors zipping across the nearly calm blue-green waters has the crew of the Royal Norwegian Navy’s frigate Roald Amundsen worried. Neither radio calls nor warning shots from a machine gun deter the fast-approaching boat, and so the frigate’s CO makes his decision. The deck crew, all wearing tactical gear and helmets, find some cover on the bridge wing and open up with their assault rifles. The steady thuds from the Amundsen’s .50-caliber machine gun soon join the fracas. The fast boat weaves and dodges as the frigate’s crew pours rifle and machine gun fire on it — all blanks, of course.

This is not part of a counter-piracy mission off the coast of Somalia, or a maritime counter-terrorism drill in the Arabian Gulf. This is BALTOPS, the largest annual naval exercise in the Baltic Sea, a region made tense by a Russia seemingly bent on reordering European security and challenging American leadership on the continent.

The BALTOPS exercise has been around for decades, but a sleepiness had descended upon it after the end of the Cold War. The focus of the exercise evolved towards softer maritime security tasks, such as counter-terrorism, maritime escort, and interdicting illicit shipments. Even Russia’s Baltic Sea Fleet became a regular participant back when the world was thought to have moved beyond geopolitical competition, and peace and stability at sea was primarily threatened by pirates, smugglers, and terrorist groups. This all changed in 2014, when Russia annexed Crimea and touched off conflict in eastern Ukraine. The Baltic Sea region became a primary friction zone between NATO and Russia, which has since poured billions into military modernization, held a string of snap exercises close to the Western alliance’s most exposed members, and stepped up naval and air activities in the region.

This has brought the BALTOPS exercise back to preparing Alliance navies for high-end maritime warfighting. And while fighting off small boats is still part of the exercise, the fifty ships, roughly fifty aircraft, and 4,000 personnel from twelve NATO nations, are really in the Baltic to sharpen their skills in anti-submarine warfare, air defense, amphibious landings, mine hunting, and the integration of air and maritime power.

The Baltic presents special challenges for naval forces. Its shallow, brackish waters play havoc with anti-submarine sensors designed for deeper seas. The radar picture is cluttered with commercial traffic and windfarms. This is especially true in the southern Baltic Sea, where BALTOPS 2017 is running from June 1-16, and where merchantmen funnel toward the Kiel Canal and the Danish Straits en route to the North Sea and to the broader North Atlantic. As I hop between warships on a U.S. Navy SH-60 helicopter, large merchant ships are nearly always in view from my perch. And in the Baltic Sea, one is never very far from land, which means that warships and aircraft are nearly always exposed to shore-based missile batteries. This is no theoretical threat: in its southeastern Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad, Russia has assembled a veritable bastion of anti-ship, air defense, and ballistic missile systems.

These challenges are not lost on the BALTOPS navies. The exercise is led by Vice Adm. Christopher Grady, commander of the U.S. Navy’s Sixth Fleet in Europe, who in interviews repeatedly returns to how “brutal the fight at sea would be in the Baltic.” Grady took up his Sixth Fleet duties late last year, but this is not his first time working with European navies. In 2004, he commanded the USS Cole when it was part of NATO’s Standing Naval Force in the Mediterranean, back when the Alliance faced a very different maritime security environment. But out at BALTOPS, Grady, who makes it hard to miss that he is a rabid Notre Dame football fan, worries about more than just the pointy end of the spear. To win at high-end warfighting at sea, he also wants the U.S. and its European allies to get better at more mundane tasks, such as casualty care, logistics, and underway replenishment.

The transatlantic relationship is currently fraught, with President Trump hectoring NATO’s European members to spend more on defense, while at the same time refusing to clearly state America’s commitment to European security (although other members of the Trump administration have done exactly that).

European allies, meanwhile, have begun to think out loud about a path away from relying on the United States for protection, while also expressing dismay about other parts of the Trump administration’s agenda. But little of this political friction is visible out in the Baltic Sea. American sailors work shoulder to shoulder with European counterparts on various staffs. U.S. ships take on fuel from a German support ship in the maritime highwire act of underway replenishment. U.S. Marines on the beach call in airstrikes from Polish F-16s.

All these efforts are made easier by longstanding cooperation that has bred deep familiarity, trust, and interoperability among the allies under the NATO umbrella. Grady also emphasizes that in the Baltic Sea, it is not about the U.S. Navy doing anyone any favors; it is very much a valuable learning experience for all participants. In a way, operations here showcase a unique form of burden-sharing: the regional allies bring unrivaled expertise in operating in the cramped and shallow Baltic — it’s their backyard, after all — while contributing ships and units tailor-made for the tasks there. America, meanwhile, brings the heavy punch needed in a high-end fight with, among other things, extended air defense, amphibious forces, land attack cruise missiles, and the ability to command and control vast operations.

But for all the high interoperability and spirit of NATO’s naval forces on display during BALTOPS, the Alliance still faces a mountain of work here and elsewhere. As I talk to the officers and crews of Estonian, German, Danish, Norwegian, Dutch, and American ships, one thing becomes clear: until just a few years ago, their collective minds were focused elsewhere, such as the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean, or the Horn of Africa, where the bad guys were more likely armed with AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, rather than supersonic anti-ship missiles and submarines that nearly rival those of the West. To rebuild those warfighting skills will take time, and more days at sea in exercises such as BALTOPS.

It will also take more ships. Since the end of the Cold War, European navies have certainly become more sophisticated; many of the ships I visited were commissioned in the mid-2000s and feature the latest in sensors, automation, computer-assisted decision-making, and crew comfort, but also faced a steep drop in numbers. But while quality in warships and crews is essential, at some point quantity becomes a quality all its own. The U.S. Navy faces a similar challenge, as it must carefully balance combatant commanders’ demands for fleet presence in Europe, the Middle East, and a Pacific region where China’s naval power is growing fast. Several European navies are eyeing an increase in the number of ships and submarines in the coming years, but it will take some time before they arrive in the fleets.

I’m returned ashore by a SH-60 helicopter to the Danish naval base in Korsor. The gray Seahawk turns heads as it clatters in for a landing in this small coastal town which is getting ready for summer and quiet days of vacation, barely aware that just over the horizon, NATO is preparing for a brutal fight at sea.

Magnus Nordenman is deputy director of the Brent Scowcroft Center on International Security at the Atlantic Council, in Washington, DC. Full bio


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Ven 16 Juin - 03:12 (2017)    Sujet du message: AFTER A SHOOTING, WHAT DO SECURITY PROS DO BEHIND CLOSED DOORS ? Répondre en citant


June 14, 2017

Wednesday’s attack on a congressional baseball practice will trigger re-evaluations of security posture, and decisions on next steps.

Even as a high-profile shooting like Wednesday’s attack at a congressional baseball practice flashes onto cable news networks, it triggers deeper, behind-the-scenes evaluations among security personnel, local police, and federal investigators, all of whom will look at their policies and asset deployments using data from the incident.

“There’s a trickle-down effect that causes all the government agencies with high-profile individuals to re-evaluate their security posture collectively across the government,” says Fred Burton, a former deputy chief of counterterrorism at the State Department’s Diplomatic Security Service and now head of security for Stratfor.

Once the dust settles, says Burton, the Washington D.C. Joint Terrorism Task Force will begin a criminal investigation, seeking to understand the actions of the alleged shooter, identified as James T. Hodgkinson, an out-of-work home inspector from Belleville, Illinois. The shooting victims include Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana, the House Majority Whip; and two Capitol Police officers who brought down Hodgkinson under fire.

The FBI Joint Terrorism Task Forces, or JTTFs “are small cells of highly trained, locally based, investigators, analysts, linguists, SWAT experts, and other specialists from dozens of U.S. law enforcement and intelligence agencies,” based in more than 100 cities across the country, according to the FBI’s website.

Among the questions that the task force will likely ask: How long was he planning the attack and what methods did he use in that planning? “That will give you a window” into other potential soft spots, Burton said. “Did he datamine this on the web? Did he see [the event] on a blog? [Hear about it] on the radio? What was the trigger?”

Investigators will also likely look at whether the shooter was driven by a specific animus toward his targets or a vaguer rage that manifested when the opportunity presented itself. That, in turn, may affect future decisions about where and how to place officers.

“You’re hoping to get specific data from this person to say, ‘I’ve fixated just on this one elected representative,’” Burton said. “Therefore, the threat would not necessarily apply to the entire elected body of the U.S. Congress. Your challenge is: if the shooter’s intent was just to shoot congresspeople, it’s much more broad. You’re going to elevate the threat posture along the capital and re-assess large-scale congressional gatherings like this. You’ll be updating threat assessments for whenever you have x number of congresspeople at any one venue. You’ll be looking at previously threatened individuals.”

Other authorities, particularly the Capitol Police, will look at whether they had properly assessed the threat at the baseball practice. They will certainly redo the threat assessment for the Congressional Baseball Game scheduled for Thursday. “I guarantee you, by tomorrow, someone will say, ‘Was a threat assessment done at this public event?’ An event that was well known, that occurs a day before a huge event at Nats Stadium. Those are the sorts of questions that will happen behind closed doors.”

The Capitol Police may also look at whether the Alexandria Police were notified about the practice beforehand. “Would uniform patrol coverage act as a deterrent in this case? There’s nothing that precludes the U.S. Capitol Police from sending uniformed police cars to this type of event either, which will be another question I would be asking.”

Local forces will mount internal investigations to focus on “what else could have been in place to mitigate this threat before the first round was fired,” said Burton.

Longer term, the question becomes what sort of equipment might someday help to protect events like a baseball practice. “I would be looking at technology tools to help me attack the pre-operational surveillance aspect of the attack cycle,” said Burton. That could include social media analysis tools to better threatening posts that could warn about criminal behavior.

“I would also be looking for surveillance technology to help me in the field,” he said. “Would there be any kind of technology solutions that perhaps could have been set up an hour before this event that might have noticed something suspicious. Is there drone technology for example, that could be used in a pre-operational surveillance capacity. If I’m part of the Capitol Police protective detail and I get there an hour before this event — which is normal — could I put a drone up to scan the area?”

  • Patrick Tucker is technology editor for Defense One. He’s also the author of The Naked Future: What Happens in a World That Anticipates Your Every Move? (Current, 2014). Previously, Tucker was deputy editor for The Futurist for nine years. Tucker has written about emerging technology in Slate, ... Full bio

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Dim 18 Juin - 21:11 (2017)    Sujet du message: PANETTA DISARMS MARINES IN AFGANISTAN FOR HIS SAFETY Répondre en citant



VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tynmaCAlesk

Ajoutée le 14 mars 2012

You who worship this corrup Gooberment disearve what is comming. Complacency and zombieism is the storm of distruction that will burn America to the ground. TREASON!!!!!!


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Juin - 02:04 (2017)    Sujet du message: LES USA LIVRENT 90 CAMIONS D'ARMES A L'OPPOSITION SYRIENNE Répondre en citant


Publié par wikistrike.com sur 19 Juin 2017, 16:45pm

Les Forces démocratiques syriennes (FDS) affirment avoir reçu un septième lot d'armes lourdes et de véhicules blindés fournis par Washington.

Une source au sein des Forces démocratiques syriennes contactée par Sputnik a fait savoir que les FDS avaient reçu un nouveau lot d'armes et de blindés américains.

«Dans le cadre de l'opération de libération de Raqqa, les États-Unis nous ont livré des véhicules blindés et des armes, dont des mortiers, des roquettes thermoguidées, des mitrailleuses lourdes, des fusils d'assaut, des jumelles de vision nocturne et des kits de déminage», a annoncé l'interlocuteur de Sputnik.

Toujours selon la source, les armes et les blindés US ont été transportés en Syrie à bord de 90 camions via le nord de l'Irak.

«Cette fois-ci, nous avons reçu un important nombre de blindés, dont nous avons grand besoin sur fond de combats acharnés entre nos forces et les djihadistes de Daech dans trois quartiers de Raqqa», a indiqué le combattant.

L'opération de libération de Raqqa, occupée par Daech depuis 2013, a débuté en novembre 2016 avec le soutien des commandos américains et de l'aviation des États-Unis et d'autres pays de la coalition internationale. Les unités des FDS, composées essentiellement de Kurdes syriens, mènent des combats au sol.



Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Juin - 02:57 (2017)    Sujet du message: IT'S OFFICIAL : INDIA AND PAKISTAN JOIN SHANGHAI COOPERATION ORGANIZATION Répondre en citant


Russia and China hope to weaken US-India links which Modi eagerly pursued but Trump has little appetite for

Wasantha Rupasinghe
Wed, Jun 14, 2017 | 1826

Amid growing hostilities between India and its arch-rival Pakistan, the two countries were granted full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) during its two-day annual summit in Kazakhstan last week.

The regional formation, which is dominated by Russia and China, was established to counter US geo-political strategy in Central Asia and the Caspian region. It includes a number of Central Asian countries: Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.

India and Pakistan were not granted membership in 2005 because of differences between Russia and China, the two leading powers in the organisation. Russia pushed for full membership of its decades-long ally, India, while China favoured Pakistan for similar reasons. In recent years, Russia and China have come together in response to Washington’s aggressive and confrontational stance and agreed to open the way for India and Pakistan to become full members.

The US has intensified its efforts to integrate India into its military-strategic agenda against China and, under the Modi government, has effectively turned India into a frontline state in Washington’s war preparations against Beijing. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has increasingly parroted the US line on the territorial disputes in the South China Sea. Last August, India agreed to open its bases to the US military.

Pakistan and China have responded to the closer line-up between the US and India by further consolidating their decades-long political, economic and military partnership. India hopes that its SCO membership will allow it to advance its geo-political ambitions in the broader Asian region and, in particular, secure access to energy-rich Central Asia.

“Joining the SCO is a low-cost initiative to increase India’s influence in Central Asia,” Constantino Xavier, a fellow at Carnegie India, recently commented.

By backing Indian membership, Beijing is seeking to expand its own interests in South Asia and weaken US-Indian ties. As Xavier noted: “India joining the SCO could open a precedent for China to claim membership in SAARC [South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation], BIMSTEC [Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation], and other regional organisations in South Asia.”

Notwithstanding their full SCO membership, there is no sign of any de-escalation of war tensions between India and Pakistan. Modi and his Pakistani counterpart Nawaz Sharif failed to hold any formal bilateral or sideline talks during the summit. Their only meeting was a brief encounter at the leaders’ lounge in the evening before the summit concert and banquet. They reportedly only “exchanged greetings” while Modi inquired about the health of Sharif and his family.

Before the SCO summit, the Hindustan Times reported on June 1 that there would be no bilateral meetings. The newspaper quoted an unnamed Indian official, who said: “The Pakistan army is playing a more emphatic role in its India policy. Everything possible is being done to spoil the ties on various fronts. As of now, there are no request from Pakistan side for any meeting.”

Modi’s speech to the SCO summit focused on the “fight against terrorism” and declared, “unless we take coordinated and strong efforts, it is not possible to find a solution.” While not naming any particular country, his obvious target was Pakistan, which New Delhi constantly accuses of waging a proxy war by supporting anti-Indian Kashmir separatist groups. While the Indian prime minister said his country fully supported “connectivity” among SCO member countries, he insisted that “sovereignty and regional integrity must be respected while inclusivity and sustainability are essential.” These remarks were significant, given that just weeks earlier India boycotted China’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) summit, citing a “sovereignty” issue. The $46 billion China and Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which is part of OBOR, passes through Pakistani-held Kashmir which India still claims.

Modi’s reference to “respect for sovereignty” shows that despite its SCO membership, India continues to oppose CPEC and the OBOR project. New Dehli, in line with Washington’s agenda, is concerned that these projects will significantly enhance China’s geo-political clout in South Asia and Eurasia more generally, and boost Pakistan’s battered economy.

War tensions between the two South Asian countries have dramatically escalated during the past year. Last September, the Indian government ordered its military to launch a “surgical strike” inside Pakistan’s territory. Modi boasted that India’s military actions meant the end of “strategic restraint” vis-à-vis Pakistan. Since then, relations have worsened with exchanges of fire across the Line of Control (LoC) that divides Indian- and Pakistani-held Kashmir. Both sides have issued war threats, including the possible use of nuclear weapons.

On June 11, the Daily Excelsior reported that the Indian military launched a major offensive against Pakistan after its army targeted defence locations and civilian areas in three sectors of the border districts of Poonch and Rajouri along the LoC. The newspaper reported that at least nine Pakistani army posts and bunkers were destroyed in retaliatory fire. Pakistan intensified its attacks a day after its army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, visited Muzaffarabad and some forward posts on the LoC.

On June 12, Geo News, quoting from Inter Services Public Relations, the Pakistan army’s media wing, reported that two young people were killed and another three injured in artillery attacks by Indian troops along the LoC. Two days earlier, a 70-year-old man was killed in Chirikot by Indian artillery. Pakistan’s ministry of foreign affairs summoned Indian Deputy High Commissioner J.P. Singh and lodged an official protest over the “unprovoked” firing by the Indian troops.
Early this month, the Indian army announced the killing of five Pakistani soldiers and the injuring of another six in a “retaliatory firing.” A Pakistan army spokesman reported that two Pakistani civilians were killed and eight injured by Indian military forces.

Source: World Socialist Website


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Juin - 03:00 (2017)    Sujet du message: ANOTHER ISRAELI LAND GRAB IN SYRIA Répondre en citant


Israel has used the war in Syria to solidify its claim to the Golan Heights

RI Staff
15 hours ago

An Israeli soldier watching over Syria's Quneitra province

For the last five years, Israel has been providing money, weapons, logistical support and even direct military assistance to "moderate rebels" with the goal of creating an Israeli-controlled "buffer zone" to ensure that the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights stay forever-occupied.

In other words: Israel is occupying more Syrian land to protect the Syrian land that it's already occupying.

According to an in-depth report by Nour Samaha

Israel’s “safe zone” now unofficially runs roughly 6 miles (10km) deep and 12 miles (20km) long beyond the demarcation line of the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. The effort is intended to prevent the Syrian government and its allies, specifically Lebanese Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guards, from maintaining a foothold along the Israeli fence. Israel used a similar tactic to establish a zone of control in the south of Lebanon during the Lebanese civil war.
For Israel, establishing a buffer zone in southern Syria not only creates distance between its border and pro-government forces – particularly those backed by Iran – it also cements Tel Aviv’s control over the occupied Golan Heights, an area of Syrian land that the Israeli army captured in 1967.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698



From Task Force 73 Public Affairs
Posted June 18, 2017

Service members from the U.S. Navy and Marine Corps and Armed Forces of the Philippines attend the exercise's opening ceremony, June 19. (U.S. Navy/MC1 Micah Blechner)

CEBU, Philippines - The U.S and Philippine navies are participating in Maritime Training Activity Sama Sama in the vicinity of Cebu, June 19-25.

Maritime Training Activity Sama Sama is designed to enhance the complexity and diversity of training opportunities, while strengthening the longstanding alliance between the U.S. and the Republic of the Philippines.

The exercise will focus on mutual security concerns that affect the Philippines including piracy and sea smuggling, maritime domain awareness and patrol, and humanitarian assistance and disaster relief preparedness.

"The training we will perform over the next week will provide excellent opportunities to deepen our long-time maritime partnership with the Philippine Navy," said Rear Adm. Don Gabrielson, commander, Task Force 73. "We thank the Philippine Navy and the people of the Philippines for being gracious hosts and we look forward to enhancing our professional ties in meaningful ways that benefit both nations."

The Tagalog phrase “Sama Sama” or “together” is the central theme of the training both at sea and ashore. The exercise provides valuable opportunities for both navies to learn and operate together at sea and foster professional dialogue during subject matter expert exchanges.

"We are honored to work with the US Navy during this Maritime Training Activity Sama Sama," said Commodore Loumer P. Bernabe, Armed Forces of the Philippines." Our training together will strengthen our relationships at the operator level and will also strengthen our alliance and partnership in maritime cooperation."

The U.S. and the Philippines continue to work together on a number of initiatives and conduct regular personnel exchanges through routine participation in bilateral and multilateral exercises such as Balikatan, Southeast Asian Cooperation and Training (SEACAT), the Rim of the Pacific exercise (RIMPAC), the Asian Defense Ministers’ Meeting (ADMM Plus), and many other bilateral subject matter expert exchanges.

"Maritime Training Activity Sama Sama is an ideal framework to strengthen our relationship with our partners in the Philippine Navy and to enhance readiness through training and evolutions ashore and at sea," said Capt. Alexis Walker, commodore, Destroyer Squadron 7. "With more than 20 years of experience working together, we are able to plan and execute exercises like the Maritime Training Activity that address shared maritime security priorities and enhance interoperability between our two navies.”

U.S. assets participating in this year’s exercise include the littoral combat ship USS Coronado (LCS 4) and the expeditionary fast transport ship USNS Millinocket (T-EPF 3) along with a P-8 Poseidon aircraft. Marines assigned to the III Marine Expeditionary Force, Navy Seabees, and staff from Commander, Task Force 73 and Destroyer Squadron 7 will also participate.

The Philippine Navy units will include the Del Pilar Class Frigate BRP Gregorio Del Pilar (PF-15), BRP Agta, an AW109 helicopter, and a BN-2 Islander aircraft, a Philippine Marine company and other naval staff will also join the exercise.

As U.S. 7th Fleet's executive agent for theater security cooperation in South and Southeast Asia, Commander, Task Force 73 conducts advanced planning, organizes resources, and directly supports the execution of maritime exercises, such as Pacific Partnership, the Naval Engagement Activity (NEA) with Vietnam, and the multi-lateral Southeast Asia Cooperation and Training (SEACAT) with Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, and Thailand.

USS Coronado (LCS 4) file photo. (U.S. Navy/MC3 Deven Leigh Ellis)


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Juin - 04:40 (2017)    Sujet du message: US NAVY COMBAT SHIP DEPLOYMENT IN SEA IS CRUCIAL Répondre en citant


June 15, 2017 Living
By dzirhan mahadzir

Related Articles

What does the US Navy do in this part of the world?

Since 2013, the United States Navy has been rotationally deploying a single Littoral Combat Ship to South-East Asia, operating out of Singapore and conducting a variety of activities, many of which are aimed at enhancing security and co-operation between nations in the region.

Littoral combat ships are designed to operate in both shallow and congested sea lanes, allowing them to operate in areas where ships requiring deep waters and space cannot go or are constrained by such, a situation common to the waters of South-East Asia given the archipelagic geography of the region.

The US Navy’s LCSs come in two different designs, the Freedom class with a conventional hull design and the Independence class with a trimaran hull design.

LCSs are designed to be configurable based on the ship’s mission, with the space to install or remove mission module packages which allows it to be configured for surface warfare, anti-submarine warfare or mine counter-measures, thus providing flexibility compared to most ship designs which have single built-in configurations.

The current LCS deployed to the region is the Independence Class USS Coronado (LCS 4) with previous deployments being the Freedom Class ships USS Freedom (LCS 1) in 2013 and USS Fort Worth from 2014 to 2016.

The USS Coronado is configured with the Surface Warfare mission package, comprising two 11m rigid hull inflatable boats (RHIB), two visit, board, search and seizure (VBSS) boarding teams, two 30mm machine guns, two Northrop-Grumman MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicles and an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter.

The Coronado’s trimaran design allows it to have a larger flight deck allowing it to carry out both Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) and helicopter operations off the deck at the same time with the Seahawk helicopter and Fire Scout UAVs.

The US Navy plans to deploy multiple LCS operating out of Singapore in the coming years.

Overseeing the LCS deployments is the US Navy command headquarters called COMLOGWESTPAC/Task Force 73, which has a small staff in Singapore.

COMLOGWESTPAC/Task Force 73 conducts advance planning, organises resources and directly supports the execution of maritime exercises between the US Navy and its partners in its area of responsibility, which covers South Asia and South-East Asia.

Recently, we had the opportunity to speak to Rear Admiral Don Gabrielson, the commander of Task Force 73 on the LCS deployment to the region and its future.

Rear Admiral Don Gabrielson (left), Commander, Task Force 73, greeting an officer from the Royal Thai Navy during the opening ceremony of the South-East Asia Cooperation and Training (SEACAT) 2016 exercise at the Changi Naval Base in Singapore.

Gabrielson in the past had served as the commanding officer of the LCS USS Freedom during its construction and commissioning and thus is well versed in the unique capabilities that the LCSs have over conventional design ships.

He pointed out a number of capabilities that the LCS has which makes it strongly suitable for the region, among them the adaptability of the LCS, due to the available configurable volume and modularity of the ship.

“There is 60% of the USS Coronado’s volume that is available to be configured. Modularity plays into that because of the standard physical and network interfaces that are all there which enables us to update the ship continuously throughout its life to keep it relevant to the changes that occur in the world,” revealed Gabrielson.

Gabrielson also said that being deployed in South-East Asia not only allows the LCS to respond faster to any situation in the region, but also its available configurable space allows it to carry additional or specialised equipment required for the situation it is responding to compared to conventional ships which have limited space and cannot be easily configured to meet a particular requirement.

He drew attention to the LCS’s suitability to the geography of South-East Asia.

From the Philippines to India, there are over 50,000 islands and if you look at the port facilities in terms of the deep draft required, a destroyer or larger ship needs a depth of 10m of water just to float, and more to move, so they can only go pierside in a dozen ports in the region.

“The LCS, with its shallower draft, allows it access to a thousand ports in the same area and because of that, you have access to thousands more inner land locations where the ship can get in and help people, help control the sea space, help protect your interest, operate with partners, and get the job done compared to larger ships with deeper drafts,” he said.

The LCSs also have a much higher speed than conventional ships in the region. The USS Coronado has a speed of over 40 knots (74km/h), making it faster than the average conventional navy ships’ speed of 25 knots (46.3km/h).

Gabrielson pointed out that the LCS’s higher speed allows it to respond faster to any situation.

“If you need help, you want that help quickly and every knot matters in a ship’s speed and the design of the LCSs allows them to maintain high speeds in waters that much larger ships would not be able to do.”

An MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicle preparing to land prior to the launch of an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter aboard littoral combat ship USS Coronado.

With South-East Asia being often struck by natural disasters, military forces in the region have been in turn mobilised to conduct Humani-tarian Assistance and Disaster Relief (HADR) operations in regard to such occurrences.

Gabrielson touched on the LCS’s suitability for such missions given its unique characteristics compared to other surface ships.

“If you go to any other warship such as frigates or destroyers, first of all, they have probably a 7m or greater draft compared to the 3m-4m of the LCS.

“That’s a big difference. The non-LCS ships may have a helicopter hangar that you can put some things in if you remove the helicopter, so it’s a very small amount of space by comparison to an LCS so you have limits to what you can do with the non-LCSs ship which are less flexible.”

In November 2013, the LCS USS Freedom delivered relief supplies to the Philippines in the wake of Typhoon Haiyan.

The USS Coronado’s air assets of two Northrop-Grumman MQ-8B Fire Scout unmanned aerial vehicles and an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter allow it to cover a large area by air in contrast to most ships which only have a single embarked helicopter.

This makes the LCS ideal for maritime search and rescue operations which require vast bodies of waters to be surveyed rapidly.

The littoral combat ship USS Freedom (foreground) and the Royal Malaysian Navy frigate KD Jebat during an exercise in 2013.

In December 2014, during its deployment to the region, the LCS USS Fort Worth was dispatched from Singapore to the Java Sea to take part in the search for Indonesia AirAsia Flight 8501 that crashed on Dec 28. The manoeuvrability and shallow draft of the design allowed the ship to efficiently conduct its search tasking in the shallow and congested water environment there.

A significant portion of the LCS activities in South-East Asia revolves around cooperation activities with other navies in the region such as port visits, participation in regional exhibitions (the USS Coronado recently took part in this year’s Langkawi International Maritime and Aviation exhibition) and military exercises.

These activities all contribute towards strengthening the ties between the US Navy and South-East Asian navies.

“The demand for these ships in the region is well off the charts; I cannot get more of them here fast enough.

“The navies of the region recognise the value of the LCS; everywhere I go, the first question I hear from them is, ‘when is LCS coming to visit because we want to operate with it, and we want to understand what the US Navy is doing with it so that we can learn from it’,” said Gabrielson.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mar 20 Juin - 04:45 (2017)    Sujet du message: BHR ESG, 31st MEU HOLDS SHIPBOARD LIVE-FIRE DRILL, CONTINUE INTEGRATION ON DEPLOYMENT Répondre en citant


Story Number: NNS170613-01Release Date: 6/13/2017 7:39:00 AM  

By Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Elijah G. Leinaar USS Bonhomme Richard Public Affairs

PHILIPPINE SEA (NNS) -- Sailors aboard amphibious assault ship USS Bonhomme Richard (LHD 6) and USS Green Bay (LPD 20) and Marines of the 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit (MEU) embarked on those ships conducted a live-fire ship's self defense drill, June 11 and 12 respectively.

The exercise was meant to improve Navy and Marine Corps integration and teamwork as Sailors and Marines develop cohesiveness at the start of a routine deployment to the Indo-Asia-Pacific region.

On both ships, the crew's small arms team worked side-by-side with the Marines building experience in the use of weapons at sea and effectively defending the ship with those weapons. The firearms used for this evolution included .50-caliber machine guns, .50-caliber snipers rifles and M240B machine guns. The combined teams fired on inflatable targets, also known as "killer tomatoes."

"We are all warriors and our blue-green team is up to every challenge because we deploy together, work together, train together and are ready to fight together," said Capt. George Doyon, commander, Amphibious Squadron (PHIBRON) 11. "At the end of the day, all the Sailors and Marines in the ESG [Expeditionary Strike Group] are closely connected during deployment; we accomplish blue-green missions every day."

Training, like the ship's self defense drill, is an ongoing process aboard all the ships of the ESG and the experience it gives to the embarked Marines of the 31st MEU prepares them for a long term integration and partnership.

"Being a part of the blue-green, Navy-Marine Corps, team is an exciting opportunity," said Cpl. Zachary Tidwell, attached to the 31st MEU aboard Bonhomme Richard. "I don't know if the other branches work seamlessly together, on a regular basis, the way the Navy and Marine Corps team does. I'm proud to work alongside them and to call them shipmate."

The Bonhomme Richard ESG consists of the flagship Bonhomme Richard, USS Green Bay (LPD 20), USS Ashland (LSD 42), and with potential for cruiser-destroyer assets to integrate when needed. More than 2,300 Marines and 2,100 Sailors will operate together as part of the ESG.

The amphibious ships are on a deployment in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region to enhance partnerships and be a ready-response force for any type of contingency.

For more news, follow the conversation @Amphib7Flt on Twitter.

For more news, visit www.navy.mil, www.facebook.com/usnavy or

For more news from Commander, Amphibious Force, U.S. 7th Fleet, visit www.navy.mil/local/ctf76/.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 21 Juin - 00:00 (2017)    Sujet du message: (2nd LD) TWO B-1B BOMBERS TO TRAIN OVER KOREA Répondre en citant


2017/06/20 13:43

(ATTN: UPDATES with U.S. Air Force's response, U.S. warship's arrival, other details; ADDS photo)

By Lee Chi-dong

SEOUL, June 20 (Yonhap) -- Two U.S. long-range strategic bombers will train with South Korea's fighter jets over the peninsula later Tuesday as part of a regular combined exercise, defense officials said.

"Our Air Force plans to hold a joint drill with two B-1Bs in the sky of the Korean Peninsula today," Lt. Col. Kim Sung-duk, a public relations officer of the South Korean Air Force, told reporters.

The B-1B Lancers are scheduled to fly over Korea for a few hours along with two F-15K fighter jets, he added.

An image of U.S. strategic assets in a file photo. (Yonhap)

He pointed out the allies have regularly conducted such a joint air training.

A source said the bombers, a key strategic asset of the U.S. forces in the Asia-Pacific region, will carry out mock bombing practice at the Pilsung Range in the eastern province of Gangwon.

The U.S. Pacific Air Forces (PACAF) would not talk in public about the issue apparently before the end of the bombers' mission.

"For operational security reasons, we will not discuss potential operations we plan to conduct with our allies," a PACAF official said.

The sortie of the U.S. bombers based in Guam comes after the reported death of a U.S. college student released from North Korea in a coma after 17 months of detention.

Otto Warmbier, a 22-year-old University of Virginia student, died at a Cincinnati hospital on Monday (local time), according to his family.

The B-1B's flight here also follows controversial remarks by Moon Chung-in, a special adviser to South Korean President Moon Jae-in on unification, security and foreign affairs, that Seoul may decrease the deployment of U.S. strategic assets here and the number of the allies' combined military drills if the North freezes its nuclear and missile development.

The presidential office dismissed it as the scholar's personal view, not the government's official position.

The U.S. sent B-1B bombers to Korea on May 29, hours after North Korea test-fired a ballistic missile.

USS Dewey (DDG 105), a U.S. guided-missile destroyer, arrives in Jeju Island for a routine visit on June 20, 2017, in this photo provided by South Korea's Navy. (Yonhap)

Meanwhile, a major U.S. warship arrived in South Korea on Tuesday in a demonstration of the naval partnership between the two sides.

The Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer USS Dewey (DDG 105) made a routine port call to Jeju Island, according to the U.S. Navy.

"This visit is yet another example of our longstanding partnership with the (South Korean) Navy," said Capt. Glenn Leverette, the deputy commander of U.S. Naval Forces Korea.

The Dewey, which is on patrol in the U.S. 7th Fleet area of operations in support of security and stability in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region, is also going to join a scheduled joint exercise with South Korean and Canadian naval ships.

"This visit is important because with each engagement, we improve our cooperation and enhance our combined defensive capabilities," said Cdr. Anthony Webber, the Dewey's commanding officer.




Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 21 Juin - 00:13 (2017)    Sujet du message: IZVESTIA : MOSCOW TO DRAW UP TERROR BLACKLISTS FOR UN Répondre en citant


Russia will compile a list of terrorist organizations and submit it to the UN's soon-to-be unveiled office of counterterrorism, as the new structure will be headed by a Russian diplomat, who will assume the post of Under-Secretary-General, the newspaper says with reference to top-ranked sources in the Foreign Ministry. Russia welcomes the initiative to form a new UN department, which was announced on June 16, and the country is ready to tackle global terrorism, the sources said.

Lavrov says more countries support Moscow’s initiative to create anti-terrorism front

"Moscow has made up a list of individuals who participated in terrorist activities. Currently, the document is in the process of getting approval so that the lists could be coordinated as soon as the new UN office is formed. The new department will be headed by a ‘point man’ from our team" one of the source said, though refusing to name the person. According to another source close to the UN administration, "the staff of the new department will be made up of the Secretariat’s personnel." "However, all countries belonging to the organization are encouraged to put forward their candidates for work in the new office," he said.

What the new structure will focus on is international consolidation in the war on terror and hammering out a unified list of terrorist organizations and separate terrorists, a source close to the United National told Izvestia. "The issue of a single interpretation of the term ‘terrorism’ is the most challenging. Everyone is perfectly aware of the fact that this has been the reason behind the formation of this department, though it was held up for a long period of time. There are loads of definitions of terrorism. Moreover, each country has its own list of terrorist structures," he said.

Former Deputy UN Chief Sergey Ordzhonikidze told the newspaper that hammering out a uniform definition of 'terrorism' is going to be a serious uphill battle, which may present significant hurdles. However, he added, the fact that the counter-terrorism office was created is itself a huge step forward, which may be considered a success, particularly for Russian diplomacy. "It takes months to set up a new department within such a huge mechanism as the United Nations. I will just remind you that the system employs more than 10,000 people," he said, adding that the new office will mostly be focused on analytical, consultative and coordination activities.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 21 Juin - 00:28 (2017)    Sujet du message: LAST BRAZILIAN CONTINGENT ASSUMES COMMAND OF PEACEKEEPING MISSION IN HAITI Répondre en citant


With the end of MINUSTAH, the experience of Brazilian service members will be leveraged in other UN missions.

Andréa Barretto/Diálogo | 6 June 2017

International Relations

The first group of the 26th BRABAT leaves for Haiti with 243 service members on May 16th. (Photo: Brazilian Army’s 11th Light Infantry Brigade)

The 26th Peacekeeping Brazilian Battalion (26th BRABAT) assumed control of the United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH, per its French acronym) on June 2nd. Made up of 970 service members – 850 from BRABAT and 120 from the Engineering Battalion – this is the last Brazilian contingent that will operate on Haitian soil within the context of the mission.

In all, the last Brazilian contingent of MINUSTAH has 850 service members who will leave Haiti by October 15th. (Photo: Brazilian Army’s 11th Light Infantry Brigade)

MINUSTAH already has a scheduled end date of October 15th, in accordance with the decision of the UN Security Council. At that time the UN will end one of its longest peacekeeping missions – 13 years of work done on the Caribbean island. The soldiers who will see through the final months of MINUSTAH are paving the way to setting up a new operation in the country — the United Nations Mission for Justice Support in Haiti (MINUJUSTH, per its French acronym) — with police officers in the predominant role.

The new initiative will be implemented for six months, in order “to assist the Haitian government to strengthen the rule of law institutions in Haiti, further support and develop the Haitian National Police, and engage in human rights monitoring, reporting, and analysis,” according to the draft resolution (S/2017/313) approved by the Security Council on April 13th.

Preparing for peacekeeping missions

The 26th BRABAT service members departed Brazil to Haiti in four groups. The first group embarked on May 16th, and the last one will leave on June 1st. Of the 850 Brazilian service members, 639 are from the Army, 30 from the Air Force, and 181 from the Navy.

The Blue Helmets taking part in the conclusion of MINUSTAH must continue maintaining a secure and stable environment while still providing support to humanitarian assistance activities for the Haitians. Therefore, Brazilian service members went through training from February to mid-April in Caçapava, São Paulo state.

Under coordination from the Brazilian Joint Center for Peacekeeping Operations (CCOPAB, per its Portuguese acronym), an organization linked to the Ministry of Defense, the training of the 26th BRABAT members included everything from French and Creole classes to riot control operations, to exercises on hospital care, and simulations of different situations that may occur in Haiti. In one of these activities, the service members trained on how to deal with the collapse of a building that was supposedly hit by a natural disaster, such as the one that happened in 2010, when an earthquake devastated the island, leaving more than 300,000 dead, including 18 representatives from the Brazilian contingent.

CCOPAB was created in 2010 specifically to support the training of members of peacekeeping and humanitarian aid missions. In seven years, this organization has already had 3,500 alumni, including service members from the Armed Forces, civilians, police officers, and firefighters from Brazil, as well as officials from allied nations.

In the last week of April, a UN team charged with evaluating troops for new peacekeeping missions was in Brazil to perform an inspection of military units, including CCOPAB. According to results, it will be possible to direct representatives from the Brazilian Armed Forces to new operations after the service members’ departure from Haiti.

The frigate União arrived in Lebanon on March 15th to take over as the flagship in UNIFIL’s Maritime Task Force, which Brazil has commanded since 2011. (Photo: Brazilian Navy)

“Brazil has great potential for using its air resources in Africa and in other missions,” stated Colonel Humayun Chohan Zia, head of the UN delegation, during their visit to Brazil, according to information released by the Ministry of Defense website. The Brazilian government is awaiting the UN’s decision on the subject. “Our service members’ expertise will be used in new missions, but it has not yet been determined what those missions will be,” reported the Ministry of Defense Public Affairs Office. Among the possibilities are operations in Congo, Liberia, Ivory Coast, and Lebanon.

Operations in Lebanon

Brazil already has substantial representation in the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), assuming control of the Maritime Task Force (MTF-UNIFIL) in 2011. That is a unique maritime force which exists within a UN peacekeeping operation, created in order to “conduct maritime patrol and interdiction operations for the purpose of providing assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces, especially the Navy, to prevent the entry of arms and related materiel into Lebanon by sea,” explained Major General Flávio Augusto Viana Rocha, director of the Navy Public Affairs Office. MTF-UNIFIL also seeks to increase the capacity of the Lebanese Navy so that it can carry out all duties related to maritime security in its territorial waters.

There are 263 Brazilian service members in the mission in Lebanon, according to Maj. Gen. Rocha. Of those, 243 are aboard the flagship (the ship where the squadron leader is located), which, since March 15th, is the frigate União. And 10 of the crew members aboard that vessel are Brazilian members of MTF-UNIFIL’s Joint Staff, for a total of 253 service members. There are three more service members in the Joint Staff, but they remain on land.

Members of the Joint Staff belong to a team that directly advises Major General Sergio Fernando de Amaral Chaves Junior, the commander of the MTF who assumed the one-year post in February. “This group covers the areas of organization, intelligence, operations, logistics, planning, communications, and training, as well as the associated legal and financial aspects,” Maj. Gen. Rocha specified.

Brazil is also contributing to UNIFIL with seven additional Army service members who are part of the Spanish Brigade stationed in the city of Marjayoun, in eastern Lebanon. They are part of that brigade’s Joint Staff, and they remain on land fulfilling the demands of the commander of that sector.

A presence in Africa

The UN is conducting 16 peacekeeping operations around the world. Brazil is participating in eight of them: the United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara (MINURSO, per its French acronym), the UN Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), the United Nations Organization Stabilization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO, per its French acronym), United Nations Interim Security Force for Abyei, in Sudan (UNISFA), the United Nations Mission in the Republic of South Sudan (UNMISS), and the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in the Central African Republic (MINUSCA, per its French acronym), in addition to MINUSTAH and UNIFIL

Out of a total of 1,283 Brazilians participating in these missions, five are police officers, and they are stationed in Haiti and South Sudan. The rest are military service members who are participating in two ways: within the troops that are formed, as in the cases of Haiti and Lebanon, or individually, as in Western Sahara, Congo, Sudan, South Sudan, and Central African Republic, when the Brazilian service members or representatives from the Joint Staff are on loan from the Ministry of Defense to carry out specific actions in the mission. Since 1948, Brazil has participated in more than 30 UN peacekeeping operations, with more than 24,000 personnel.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 21 Juin - 00:35 (2017)    Sujet du message: THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC LEADS NEW HORIZONS 2017 Répondre en citant


Military doctors and civilian authorities provide medical assistance and humanitarian aid to remote communities.

Julieta Pelcastre/Diálogo | 20 June 2017
International Relations

The Dominican Ministry of Defense and the Office of Security Cooperation at the U.S. Embassy in Santo Domingo initiated the civilian-military exercise New Horizons 2017, “Working Together for a Better Future.” (Photo: Dominican Ministry of Defense)

Between March 1st and July 3rd, as part of the New Horizons 2017 exercise, the Office of Security Cooperation at the U.S. Embassy in Santo Domingo and the Dominican Ministry of Defense (MIDE, per its Spanish acronym) are providing health care services and building three clinics and a vocational school in the provinces of San Juan de la Managua and Azua. The assistance is being provided through Task Force Grand Slam with the motto, “Working Together for a Better Future.” A contingent comprising roughly 200 troops from Air Forces Southern (AFSOUTH), the Air Force component of U.S. Southern Command (SOUTHCOM), health care professionals, and engineers have joined forces with the counterparts in the Dominican Armed Forces to provide free medical outreach in the two Dominican provinces.

The wide-reaching program, sponsored by U.S. Southern Command, will benefit thousands of Dominicans. (Photo: Dominican Ministry of Defense)

New Horizons is an annual, joint exercise launched in the mid-1980s to provide humanitarian aid in Central and South America, and the Caribbean. Its main goal is to promote bilateral cooperation, interoperability, and joint-response capacities during natural disasters. Sponsored by SOUTHCOM and executed by AFSOUTH, the civilian-military humanitarian aid exercise is backed by the ministries of Health, Education, and Sports, as well as by civilian authorities in the jurisdictions that benefit from the assistance.

During the medical outreach days, 15,000 residents of Azua and San Juan receive medical treatment free of charge from specialists in the fields of dentistry, general medicine, optometry, pediatrics, dermatology, and elective and ambulatory surgery. Surgeries are performed at the Military Hospital of the Dominican Armed Forces on those suffering from gynecological, ophthalmological, urological, and ENT issues. = ... and force vaccinations

U.S. troops, in collaboration with the MIDE Office of Engineering, are building two health care centers in the towns of North and South Corbano in San Juan, and a third in Hato Nuevo Cortez in Azua. They are also erecting a vocational school in the community of Arroyo Cano, which will help children develop their potential.

“These health care centers will have a great impact on these remote communities. Even so, they must become part of the government’s health care strategy so they can have permanent doctors and not run the risk of being abandoned,” Daniel Pou, a Dominican security and defense analyst, told Diálogo. With the goal of ensuring the success of the humanitarian aid project, Dominican Army, Air Force, and Navy personnel are providing security in the housing centers and in places where the infrastructure work is being performed. = But first, they have to destroy the health care system and after the US military is coming under the guise of humanitarian aid. Don't you see the same destruction of health care in your country? Here, you can see the future they are to prepare for our countries.

Development and solidarity

Task Force Grand Slam began the civic-military humanitarian assistance program in Dominican Republic in March. (Photo: U.S. Embassy Santo Domingo)

“This humanitarian aid program is part of the cooperation between the two countries in which we are promoting human development and solidarity for those in need,” Lieutenant General Rubén D. Paulino Sem, the Dominican defense minister, said during the New Horizons 2017 opening ceremony, according to a MIDE report. These programs have been conducted in five of the Dominican Republic’s 32 provinces on six occasions since 2006.

Approximately 105,000 residents have benefited from the health care services during the six joint humanitarian exercises,” Colonel Rafael David Abreu, deputy director of operations for the Office of Plans and Operations of the MIDE Joint Staff, reported to Diálogo. “New Horizons offers U.S. and Dominican troops the opportunity to train in health care, logistics, and civil engineering while improving the quality of life for the population,” he stressed. But it also serves as a forum for forging relationships between military members and government officials from the two countries.

Humanitarian aid plan

MIDE indicated that the civilian-military exercises allow the participating units to improve their response capacity. Thus, they can more quickly and efficiently deal with the effects of natural disasters on vulnerable populations, and promote regional security and stability.

“Cooperating on humanitarian aid helps with the important task of involving our military corps in finding solutions or mitigating the needs of the Dominican people, and this inspires trust and acceptance in the community,” Col. Abreu stressed. “Any social program should have an ongoing presence in order to have a greater social impact, mainly in the country’s remote regions,” Pou added.

In addition to the invaluable civilian-military aid operation, SOUTHCOM and the Dominican authorities are discussing coordination for the next joint combined mission - Continuing Promise 2018. This is another effort by SOUTHCOM to bring health care services, humanitarian aid, and civic support to vulnerable communities in Latin America and the Caribbean.

“Despite the big cultural differences, our ties of mutual trust and support are strengthened when we conduct joint work. This helps build a great deal of professionalism and understanding between members of the two countries’ armed forces,” Col. Abreu concluded.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Mer 21 Juin - 00:44 (2017)    Sujet du message: RAW: FIRST BATCH OF TURKISH TROOPS ARRIVES IN QATAR Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfppMlr3dgk

Ajoutée le 20 juin 2017

Courtesy: Qatar TV

The first batch of Turkish troops arrives at a Turkish military base in Doha on Sunday, as Ankara is trying to strengthen Qatar in the standoff with Gulf neighbors. Last week Turkish Parliament has approved the deployment of troops & a deal to train gendarmerie force personnel.

RT LIVE http://rt.com/on-air

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Jeu 22 Juin - 11:58 (2017)    Sujet du message: PLUS DE 30 GROUPES TACTIQUES PRÊTS AU COMBAT DANS L'OUEST DE LA RUSSIE Répondre en citant


 Dernières news
France / Dernières news
 il y a 15 heures

Les militaires russes déployés dans la région la plus occidentale de la Russie sont prêts au combat, a constaté ce mercredi le ministre russe de la Défense Sergueï Choïgou. Prenant la parole dans la ville russe de Kaliningrad, où il s'est rendu pour tenir la réunion d'un collège de la Défense, M. Choïgou a indiqué: «Plus de 30 groupes tactiques qui sont reconstitués en personnel et munis de tout le matériel nécessaire sont prêts à entrer immédiatement en action.»

Selon lui, au cours du dernier semestre, les militaires du district ont reçu plus de 300 unités d'armement et de matériel militaire, l'instruction de combat des soldats est constamment en cours de perfectionnement.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Jeu 22 Juin - 12:47 (2017)    Sujet du message: MACRON : LA FRANCE POURRA FRAPPER SEULE LA SYRIE Répondre en citant


Par contre, l'utilisation d'armes chimiques via les vaccinations en France qui veulent passer de 3 à 11 vaccins obligatoires pour les enfants, il n'y a pas de problème, alors que nos enfants et petits-enfants sont de plus en plus en danger, de plus en plus malade sans parler des infirmités et de la mortalité qui est nié par le et les gouvernements suite aux vaccinations. De même les parents qui résistent vivent des pressions énormes face aux lois qui changent un peu partout, les criminalisant pour leur prise de position anti-vaccinale.

Ce qui se passe en Syrie avec cette guerre fait des milliers de victimes civils tout en détruisant complètement le pays. La France est positionné dans plusieurs pays dans le monde et rien de bon n'est arrivé aux nations qui ont vu leur pays être envahi et détruit par la France. Ce jeu de guerre ne cesse de croître, maintenant sous le couvert de la lutte contre le terroriste. La France et tous les pays sont unis dans un seul et même agenda, une même pensée et une même unité d'action, qui se répand comme un venin sur le monde entier.


07:52 22.06.2017(mis à jour 07:55 22.06.2017)

La France sera en mesure de porter des frappes aériennes de façon autonome en Syrie en cas d’utilisation d’armes chimiques dans la région, a déclaré le Président français Emmanuel Macron.

Le chef de l'État français vient de mettre les points sur les i quant à sa vision de la résolution de la crise syrienne qui ravage le pays depuis plusieurs années.

Ainsi, l'Hexagone n'hésitera pas à bombarder le territoire syrien afin de détruire des stocks d'armes chimiques, a déclaré M. Macron dans une interview aux quotidiens Le Figaro, Le Temps, Le Soir, Süddeutsche Zeitung, The Guardian, Corriere della Sera, El Pais et Gazeta Wyborcza.

«S'il est avéré que des armes chimiques sont utilisées sur le terrain et que nous savons en retracer la provenance», Paris sera en mesure de bombarder seule afin de «détruire les stocks d'armes chimiques identifiés», a affirmé le locataire de l'Élysée.

© AP Photo/ Mohammed El-Sheikhy
Macron: faire la guerre en Libye était une erreur

«L'utilisation d'armes chimiques donnera lieu à des répliques, y compris de la France seule. La France sera d'ailleurs à cet égard parfaitement alignée avec les États-Unis», a-t-il poursuivi. En outre, le Président français a souligné l'importance de la coopération avec Moscou, indispensable pour mettre un terme aux hostilités dans la région.

«Nous avons besoin de la coopération de tous pour les éradiquer (les terroristes, ndlr), en particulier de la Russie. […] Réussir à travailler ensemble sur la Syrie pour lutter contre le terrorisme et déboucher sur une vraie sortie de crise, je pense que c'est faisable», a conclu M. Macron.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Ven 23 Juin - 08:25 (2017)    Sujet du message: ACTING FBI DIRECTOR SOUNDS LIKE TOP FBI PRIORITY IS SPYING ON AMERICANS Répondre en citant


VIDEO : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsTv4-w5nG0

Ajoutée le 21 juin 2017

June 21, 2017 C-SPAN News http://MOXNews.com

Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe testified at a hearing on President Trump’s fiscal year 2018 budget request for the bureau. He denied President Trump’s claims that the agency was in disarray under fired FBI Director James Comey. He also said that Director Comey “enjoyed a deep and positive” relationship with the men and women of the FBI.

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Ven 23 Juin - 23:42 (2017)    Sujet du message: RESTRICTED U.S. ARMY TRAINING FOR RECONNAISSANCE TROOP AND BELOW IN URBAN OPERATIONS Répondre en citant



February 7, 2013
Source: Public Intelligence

Because the operational environment (OE) requires Army forces to operate in urban areas, commanders must have accurate information on the complex human elements, infrastructure, and physical terrain that make up the urban environment. The limits on imagery and electronic reconnaissance and surveillance (R&S) capabilities place a premium on human-based visual reconnaissance. Reconnaissance troops and platoons must be trained to gather and analyze the necessary information and provide it to their commanders and higher headquarters. This chapter discusses definitions, training strategy, prerequisite training, individual task training, and collective task training designed to prepare reconnaissance units at troop level and below for operations in urban terrain.


1-25. The following sample tasks are listed in TC 7-98-1:

  • Conduct cordon and search operations, including site exploitation (SE).
  • Conduct roadblock/checkpoint operations.
  • Conduct civil disturbance operations.
  • Secure civilians during operations.
  • Process detainees and enemy prisoners of war (EPW).

1-26. See FM 3-06.11 for a review of additional tasks related to stability operations and civil support operations. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

  • Conduct area security, including presence patrols.
  • Conduct convoy escort.
  • Conduct route clearance operations.


3-60. The likelihood of civil disturbances during urban operations is high. Handled poorly, the reaction to a civil disturbance can quickly escalate out of control, with potential long-term negative effects for mission accomplishment. Conversely, a well-handled situation will lead to an enhanced view of the reconnaissance platoon’s discipline and professionalism and potentially could result in fewer such incidents in the future.


3-61. Table 3-9 lists the supporting tasks that must be accomplished as part of controlling civilian movement and disturbances.


3-62. A possible TTP description for this task is covered by procedures known by the acronym of IDAM:

  • Isolate.
  • Dominate.
  • Maintain common situational awareness (SA).
  • Employ multidimensional/multiecheloned actions.
3-63. The first step entails isolating, in time and space, the trouble spot from outside influence or interaction. Unit tactical operation centers in the theater must develop TTP that “isolate” riots or demonstrations to keep them from becoming larger and potentially more violent. The idea is to close access into and out of the demonstration location (Figure 3-13). Once access is closed, rioters tend to tire within hours, and the demonstration dies down, eventually resulting in a peaceful conclusion. Figure 3-14 provides a technique for positioning several tiers of checkpoints and tactical control points, given the mission to isolate a riot. Controlling major road networks into and out of the demonstration area also serves to enhance trafficability if the riot escalates.

3-64. Units dominate the situation through force presence and control of information resources. They can demonstrate an overwhelming show of force at command posts (CP) and dispatch helicopters to conduct overflights above demonstrations and massing civilian mobs. In addition, use of appropriate air assets can give commanders a bird’s-eye view of events, providing real-time updates on the situation and ensuring that units know the “ground truth” at all times. This knowledge gives commanders a decisive advantage both in negotiations with potentially hostile elements and in tactical maneuvers.

3-65. The following factors apply for the platoon in attempting to dominate the situation:

  • Although units can dominate a civil disturbance using nonlethal munitions, it is important to consider force protection issues. In addition, if aviation assets are available, reconnaissance or utility helicopters can provide a show of force. Attack helicopters should be used in anoverwatch or reserve position.
  • Forces may need to detain group leaders or instigators to dominate a civil disturbance. An instigator is identified as a person who is “prodding” others to commit disruptive acts or who is orchestrating the group. Often, an instigator carries a bullhorn or hand-held radio.
  • The smallest unit that can employ the “snatch-and-grab” technique is a platoon. Before a platoon deploys to quell a riot, identify a four-person snatch-and-grab team, two to secure the individual and two to provide security. It is imperative that each member of the snatch-and-grab team wears the Kevlar helmet with face shield and flak vest, but the team should not bring weapons or load-bearing equipment with them into the crowd. See Figure 3-15 for an illustration of the snatch-and-grab team.
  • In accordance with Executive Order 11850, the President of the United States must approve the use of the riot control agency (RCA). The U.S. policy is to employ RCAs in limited circumstances, though never as a method of warfare. Commanders should be conscious that use of RCAs might pose a risk of escalation or public panic if it creates the erroneous perception that a chemical weapon is being used.
  • Another element that is crucial for successful civil disturbance operations is the use of combat camera personnel. Document events to hold personnel, factions, and gangs or groups accountable. To ensure that the right message is being presented, control the information environment through the synchronized efforts of information engagement assets, with support from the staff judge advocate (SJA) and civil affairs (CA) offices.

3-66. Commanders and leaders maintain SA through timely, accurate, and complete multisource reporting. They can receive reports from a broad spectrum of sources. Unit CPs, air assets, and close liaison with HN police, NGOs, PVOs, and other civilian agencies all contribute to an accurate assessment of any situation. In addition, UAS, such as the Predator and Pioneer, are effective in observing large sectors of an AO. Analyze the reports produced and relay them to each unit involved in the operation.

3-67. As part of the IDAM procedures, multidimensional/multiechelon actions may entail the following considerations:

  • Policy and legal considerations.
  • ROE.
  • Standards of conduct.
  • High visibility of civil disturbance operations with the media, including leaders who must interact with the media.
  • Crowd dynamics.
  • Communication skills for leaders who must manage aggressive and violent behavior of individuals and crowds.
  • Use of electronic warfare to monitor and control belligerent communications.
  • Tactics.
  • Lethal overwatch.
  • Search and seizure techniques.
  • Apprehension and detention.
  • Neutralization of special threats.
  • Recovery team tactics.
  • Cordon operations to isolate potential areas of disturbance.


5-33. The smallest organizational PSYOP element is the tactical PSYOP team (TPT), consisting of three Soldiers. In high-intensity conflict, the TPT normally provides PSYOP support to a squadron. During counterinsurgency (COIN) and stability operations, planning and execution are primarily conducted at the troop level because the troop is the element that most often directly engages the local government, populace, and adversary groups. Operating in the troop AO allows TPTs to develop rapport with the target audience. This rapport is critical to the accomplishment of the troop’s mission. The TPT chief, usually a SSG or SGT, is the PSYOP planner for the troop commander. He also coordinates with the tactical PSYOP detachment (TPD) at the squadron level for additional support to meet the troop commander’s requirements. PSYOP planning considerations include the following:

  • The most effective methods for increasing acceptance of friendly forces in occupied territory.
  • The most effective methods of undermining the will of the threat to resist.
  • The impact of PSYOP on the civilian population, friendly government, and law enforcement agencies in the area.
  • Clearly identified, specific PSYOP target group(s).
  • Undermining the credibility of threat leadership and whether or not it will bring about the desired behavioral change.


Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Sam 24 Juin - 01:56 (2017)    Sujet du message: YOUR NAVY OPERATING FORWARD – POLAND, SPAIN, CHINA Répondre en citant


Read more : http://navylive.dodlive.mil/2017/06/23/your-navy-operating-forward-poland-s…

Revenir en haut

Hors ligne

Inscrit le: 18 Juin 2011
Messages: 30 698

MessagePosté le: Sam 24 Juin - 02:02 (2017)    Sujet du message: NEW SECURITY MEASURES AT JERUSALEM'S DAMASCUS GATE Répondre en citant


By Hana Levi Julian -
29 Sivan 5777 – June 22, 2017 0

Photo Credit: Flash 90
Police at Damascus Gate

The Israeli government is implementing new security measures at the Damascus Gate entrance to the Old City of Jerusalem.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met Wednesday night to discuss the issue with Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, Israel Police Commissioner Roni Alsheikh and Jerusalem District Police Chief Yoram HaLevy.

The measures are being taken to ensure the safety of Border Guard Police who guard the area.

Elevated guard posts are being installed so the public will no longer have direct access to the police officers.

Entry through the Gate itself will only be available through new, clear passages that are to be established as well.

The officers will be equipped with special devices to help increase their technical ability to scan the area.

These moves come in the wake of last Friday’s deadly terrorist attack which claimed the life of 23-year-old Border Guard Policewoman Hadas Malka, z’l, who was stabbed to death by a Palestinian Authority terrorist just a few moments before the start of the Sabbath as she stood guard at the Damascus Gate entrance to the Old City.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife Sara paid a condolence call to the home of the late Staff Sergeant-Major z’l, on Sunday night (June 18) after she was laid to rest at the military cemetery in Ashdod.

Israel Police have arrested two people in connection with the attack, Israel Police announced Wednesday. One of the detainees is the mother of one of the terrorists.


Revenir en haut
Contenu Sponsorisé

MessagePosté le: Aujourd’hui à 11:36 (2018)    Sujet du message: UNITED NATIONS, GLOBAL ARMY, POLICIA, MILICIA, GANG AND... (PARTIE 2) P.1

Revenir en haut
Montrer les messages depuis:   
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    LE VOÎLE DÉCHIRÉ (1) Index du Forum -> LES CAMPS DE CONCENTRATION/CONCENTRATION CAMPS -> UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL ARMY, POLICIA, MILICIA, GANG .... (PARTIE 2) Toutes les heures sont au format GMT + 2 Heures
Aller à la page: <  1, 2, 3140, 141, 142170, 171, 172  >
Page 141 sur 172

Sauter vers:  

Index | Creer un forum | Forum gratuit d’entraide | Annuaire des forums gratuits | Signaler une violation | Conditions générales d'utilisation
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Traduction par : phpBB-fr.com