In an effort to be in compliance with GDPR we are providing you with the latest documentation about how we collect, use, share and secure your information, we want to make you aware of our updated privacy policy here
Enter your name and email address below to receive our newsletter.
2014-12-12 Recently, the Singaporean and Australian forces exercised joint amphibious landings.
The two countries have a close defense working relationship and as the Aussies are adding new amphibious capabilities working with regional neighbors to enhance security makes a great deal of sense.
The video in this story was shot on 11/8/14 and released by the Australian Ministry of Defense on 11/18/14 and shows the landings.
According to the Australian Ministry of Defense:
Chief of Defence Force, Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin, AC, along with senior defence and ministerial representatives from both Australia and Singapore were given a demonstration of the amphibious capabilities being used throughout Exercise Trident on Saturday the 8th of November 2014.
Australian Army soldiers from the 7th Battalion, the Royal Australian Regiment practiced amphibious and offensive operations alongside their Singapore Armed Forces counterparts during the exercise, which was held in Shoalwater Bay, Queensland.
The Republic of Singapore Navy’s Landing Ship Tank (LST) RSS Persistence hosted the soldiers for two nights, before the land forces went ashore to conduct the assault phase of the exercise and share tactics, techniques and procedures within the Australian and Singapore defense forces.
Exercise Trident is a bilateral exercise involving elements of the Singapore Armed Forces and the Australian Defence Force, which provides opportunities for the exchange of subject matter expertise by the armed forces of both nations.
The exercise is conducted within the Defence International Engagement Plan, which is focused on building closer relationships between Australia and its regional neighbors.
Troops from the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) and Australian Defence Force (ADF) would have secured a beachfront, marched inland and taken an objective together.
It was a tightly-integrated, orchestral-like maneuver, starting with an amphibious landing by the Republic of Singapore Navy’s (RSN’s) Landing Ship Tank RSS Persistence.
As the boots hit the beach, two Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) AH-64D Apache attack helicopters flew overhead.
This is the first time that combat troops from both countries have conducted joint drills at Exercise Trident, one of the components of the two-month long Exercise Wallaby this year.
Exercise Trident alone involves more than 750 SAF personnel and 43 ADF troops. The larger Exercise Wallaby sees participation from more than 5,000 SAF personnel and over 400 SAF assets.
Second Minister for Defence Chan Chun Sing and Australian Assistant Minister for Defence Stuart Robert visited the troops on 8 Nov. Said Mr Chan: “We are very thankful to the Australian authorities for giving us this opportunity to train in Shoal Water Bay.”
He added: “This year we have many more ADF personnel joining us in the combined operations. Both sides have learnt from each other, and that (provides) a platform for us to build interoperability between the two armed forces.”
Mr Robert spoke well of the SAF, saying: “The SAF is a well-trained, disciplined, quite amazing fighting force. Watching some of the exercises they have done today, I continue to be amazed and impressed to see how well it is going.”
“The fact that we can be here side-by-side training together… speaks volumes about where our nations are going.”
“The opportunity for Australia and Singapore to grow close as nations, economically and militarily, is substantial,” added Mr Robert.
The SAF soldiers are exercising with troops from the 7th Royal Australian Regiment, based in Adelaide.
Captain Karina Cann, who is trained as a military logistician, and is an exercise planner from the Australian Army, said: “The organisation and how information gets passed from the planners to the troops on the ground is brilliant. The SAF guys just get up and do the work and get it all done, no matter how tired they are.”
For the combat troops on the ground, Exercise Wallaby presents a valuable opportunity to learn. “I’m looking forward to seeing how the Australians operate and how we can learn from them,” said Staff Sergeant Muhammad Ashik, a Platoon Sergeant from the Battalion Task Force for Exercise Trident.
Said Air Force Engineer 3rd Sergeant Richard Charlie: “Operating in Australia brings several challenges. We work in the open when out in the SWBTA (Shoal Water Bay Training Area) and at night, there is less light so it’s harder to do our servicing (of aircraft).”
“But it’s an enriching experience because we get to practise more things, such as weapon-loading, which we don’t do so much of back in Singapore.”
Exercise planners, too, had a good work-out. Working with his counterparts from the Army and Air Force, Captain (CPT) Kody Toh had to plan the conduct of Exercise Trident.
“One of the key things I’ve learnt here is to adapt to changes. In such a large exercise, changes are inevitable, and we have to re-work our plans to make sure that all three Services can meet their training requirements,” said CPT Toh.
“SWBTA is one of the few places where we can have a tri-Service exercise, and it’s very rewarding to see everything come together,” said CPT Toh, one of the exercise planners from the RSN.
The SAF and the ADF share a long history of military cooperation, with extensive interactions that include bilateral and multilateral exercises, mutual visits and professional exchanges. Both countries are part of the Five Power Defence Arrangements.
“We’ve had shared training obligations for decades and Singapore is one of Australia’s closest friends in the region,” said Mr Robert.
For a recent piece on Australia building out its amphibious capabilities see the following:
12/10/2014 In visits to both Rome and to High Wycombe, the key role which the European Air Transport Command (EATC) is playing in enhancing European capabilities and synergies was highlighted.
In a visit to Rome earlier this year, the Chief of Staff of the Italian Air Force, Lt. General Preziosa highlighted the role of the command as well as a new European command, the PR Centre.
We are contributing our transport aircraft and new tankers to the EATC”.
Besides Italy is engaged with EAG nations to establish a Personnel Recovery (PR) Centre, based in Italy, in 2015.
This centre is addressing a very important operational function (PR), in order to foster joint-combined interoperability through common approaches and common procedures, under a lead service approach.
I believe those are simple and tangible examples of what is commonly known as pooling & sharing initiatives.
And the visit to High Wycombe recently, highlighted the key role which the European Air Group played in shaping a way ahead in order for the EATC to become operational.
BG De Ponti: The EAG tackles airpower issues, which need solutions to enhance interoperability among the member nations.
This can lead to tactical or strategic solutions.
And we have had important achievements to date such as the European Air Transport Command (EATC).
According to the EATC itself, the role is to enhance synergy and capabilities.
The Netherlands, Belgium, France and Germany have put major parts of their air transport- and air to air refueling fleets under the operational control (OPCON) of the EATC.
On 22 November 2012 Luxembourg officially joined the EATC, Spain followed on 03 July 2014, finally Italy on 04 December 2014.
Now the missions of almost 200 aircraft are planned, tasked and controlled out of Eindhoven.
In addition to that the EATC runs a nationally defined level of responsibility for aircrew training, coordination of training and exercise objectives as well as the harmonization of appropriate air transport regulations of the participating nations.
The overall objective is to manage the scarce resource air transport as effectively and efficiently as possible.
And Italy joined officially on December 4, 2014.
According to the Italian Ministry of Defense, Italy will enhance its contribution to European defense and enhance cost effectiveness by joining the EATC.
The Note of Participation ratifies Italy’s accession to the European Air Transport Command (EATC), the military air transport coordination center that, since 2010, has employed aircraft contributed by participating countries to implement, among others, air-to-air refueling and aeromedical evacuation activities.
For the first time the event was broadcast live via streaming from Palazzo Baracchini, seat of the Ministry of Defence.
“Today’s signature is a success of the Italian Presidency of the Council of the European Union: a concrete substantial result marking Italy’s accession to a flexible structure that allows us to ensure greater security”. Minister Pinotti said today on the occasion of Italy’s signature of EATC’s Note of Participation.
“Thinking beyond, thinking anew”, the Minister added, “means rethinking our national vision to achieve a broader vision on a European scale”.
Italy joins officially the EATC. 12/4/14. Credit: Italian MOD
The Note of Participation was signed by Chief of the Italian Air Force, Lt Gen Pasquale Preziosa, EATC Commander, Gen Christian Badia, and military representatives of the project’s six other participating nations: France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg and Spain.
In brief, by joining the European Air Transport Command, Italy will be able to:
– Implement the guidelines of the Council of the European Union during the Italian Presidency;
– Make our national military air transport system more efficient, reducing costs currently incurred for the same activities.
Italy’s accession to the multinational Command is a tangible result that enhances national military air transport capabilities, in particular in our sectors of excellence such as air-to-air refueling and aeromedical evacuation in bio-containment conditions.
These are our blue chips, that we can use to borrow aircraft from other participating nations, ensuring greater operational flexibility and cost reduction by cutting down on outsourcing when suitable national aircraft are not available.
We will therefore have access to oversize air transport capabilities, cut down on outsourcing contracts and meet transport requirements with suitable aircraft, thus significantly improving the cost-effectiveness ratio for the entire sector.
Moreover, operations’ planning support contracts can be optimized, ensuring significant savings starting as soon as 2016.
We are publishing a Special Report by Richard Weitz on the role of Kazakhstan on nuclear security.
The first piece in the three part series which will conclude with the release of the report was published earlier this week.
The Foreign Minister of Kazakhstan, H.E. ErlanIdrissov, recently visited Washington and co-chaired the third U.S.-Kazakhstan Strategic Partnership Dialogue.
According to a Fox News story, Kazakhstan is an important ally in dealing with a number of issues, ranging from Islamic terrorism to nuclear security.
Kazakhstan supports the United States in the struggle against Islamic State, the Central Asian nation’s foreign minister said Wednesday in Washington, where he also took the opportunity to urge a “peaceful solution” to the crisis in Ukraine.
Erlan Idrissov addressed those issues, among others, in a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry.
“Terrorism is a global phenomenon. The so-called Islamic State is a very ugly face of that unfortunate illness,” Kazakhstan’s top diplomat told Efe after his discussion with Kerry.
“The IS,” Idrissov stressed, “has become an international issue. Consequently, we welcome and we support the international community’s efforts to battle against the so-called Islamic State.”
Asked whether Washington has requested Kazakh military support for U.S.-led operations against IS in Syria and Iraq, Idrissov said: “The United States has made a universal appeal to all members of the international community to participate.”
“We have our way of addressing that matter, especially via cooperation between our respective agencies. That is very important,” the foreign minister said, without offering any details.
“Terrorism doesn’t recognize borders. It has become a global threat. Therefore, joining forces is a very wise and indispensable way of confronting that challenge,” he said, insisting that IS “does not deserve the name of Islam, because Islam is a very peaceful religion.”
Speaking to reporters before the meeting at the State Department, Kerry hailed the “growing security partnership” between the United States and Kazakhstan.
“We are working on the challenge of ISIL (Washington’s term for Islamic State), of counterterrorism,” the secretary said.
The two officials also discussed the conflict in Ukraine, a dispute that “makes life in Eurasia very complicated,” Idrissov told Efe.
“Kazakhstan is very unhappy with the fact that this crisis has still not been resolved,” he said, though adding that he was optimistic about a possible solution…..
Idrissov and Kerry also talked about the situation in Afghanistan, where Astana is supporting the security forces, as well as nuclear proliferation, Iran’s nuclear program and the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.
The minister’s agenda in Washington includes securing U.S. backing for energy-rich Kazakhstan’s bid to join the World Trade Organization.
“This is a very important point in our bilateral dialogue,” Idrissov said. “The U.S. supports Kazakhstan’s accession, but this matter is technically very complex. I hope that Kazakhstan enters the WTO sooner rather than later.”
President Barack Obama’s administration is “working hard on Kazakhstan’s accession to the WTO,” Kerry said at the State Department.
The meetings concluded with the issuance of a joint statement, which constitutes the output of the Third U.S.-Kazakhstan Strategic Partnership Dialogue.
What follows are his official remarks made on December 10, 2014 at the 2nd Kazakhstan – U.S. Convention on “Working Together For a Secure Future” at the Political Session “Turning Great Games into Great Gains.”
Ladies and gentlemen,
It is a great pleasure to be back here, to have the chance to reconnect with old friends and, hopefully, to make some new ones. I want to thank the Council of Turkic American Associations for helping to put together this event. Also, let me express my appreciation to the Atlantic Council for providing intellectual input and content for portions of the Convention as a knowledge partner. And I would like to thank all of the sponsors of the Convention and the U.S-Kazakhstan Business Association.
On a personal note, I must express my gratitude to Ambassador Umarov and his able team at the Embassy of Kazakhstan here in Washington, D.C. They do an extraordinary job representing the interests of Kazakhstan in the United States – a task, I know from personal experience, is not easy in the very competitive D.C. environment. So, thank you!
As for our delegation from Kazakhstan, Minister of Economic Integration Zhanar Aitzhanova is with us today, we also have high-ranking representatives of the Ministry of Investments and Development, National Chamber of Entrepreneurs of Kazakhstan, National Export and Investment Agency “Kaznex Invest” and national company “Astana EXPO-2017”.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry shakes hands with Kazakh Foreign Minister Yerlan Idrisov after they addressed reporters at the U.S. Department of State in Washington, D.C., on December 10, 2014
Kazakhstan’s destiny has been determined by our location at the “Heart of Eurasia”, which has shaped our foreign, trade, energy and development policies. We have embraced this reality and worked hard to position ourselves as a bridge between Europe and Asia connecting East with West, the North with the South, and developed and implemented genuinely a “multi-vector foreign policy.”
Two years ago, Kazakhstan embarked on a new, long-term development plan – the 2050 Strategy. At its heart is the ambition for our nation to become one of the world’s 30 most developed countries by 2050.
We knew, of course, the path to achieving this ambition was never going to be smooth. There are always bumps on the way and setbacks to overcome. And in recent months, the geopolitical crisis and the sanctions policy of the leading powers have created an additional challenge for us. Kazakhstan, as a part of the world economy and a country located very close to the epicenter of geopolitical tensions, is experiencing the negative impact of these forces. We see the results with prices in global markets dropping, and general economic growth slowing down.
We have responded to these immediate challenges by adopting a New Economic Policy “NurlyZhol”. This is counter-cyclical in character and will allow us to stimulate our economy and continue its structural reforms.
Over the past years of strong growth in our economy, we have deliberately put aside revenues from our extractive industry into the National Fund. We will now use funds from it to further transform our economy – develop transport, energy, industrial and social infrastructure, and empower our small and medium businesses.
The over-arching goal is to bring together all regions of Kazakhstan through an improved network of railroads, highways, and air services. Better connections between the regions will lead to greater national well-being, strengthening trade and economic ties and leading to the emergence of new markets. “Nurly Zhol” has been designed to create a multiplier effect in other economic sectors. Cargo traffic will accelerate and increase. The volume of trade moving through and across the country will grow. By bringing together distant parts of the nation through this New Economic Policy we will also strengthen global transport links between Europe and Asia.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is a long way to go before our country can join the ranks of the most development nations but we are starting from a strong position. We have made great progress since our independence in 1991. Our vibrant market economy has grown twenty-fold. For the past decade we have been the fastest growing nation in the region and are now the economic powerhouse of Central Asia.
But we also continue to look beyond our borders. As a land-locked country, Kazakhstan knows the prosperity of our neighbors is also crucial to our progress. Realizing the potential of the “New Silk Road” is essential for ensuring regional security in the immediate future. Only through economic development and political stability is it possible to win hearts and minds of people.
We also recognize that with good fortune comes an even greater responsibility. Soon, we will launch a new agency for international development – KazAID that will focus initially on Central Asia and Afghanistan.
The situation in Afghanistan, in the wake of the recent elections and the withdrawal of the peacekeeping contingent, is a matter of real importance for the wider security of Central Asia.
Here, too, we are ready to accept our responsibility. The Government of Kazakhstan has allocated $2.38 million for the construction of social infrastructure in Afghanistan. Emergency food assistance of more than $17 million has been provided. We have also allocated $50 million to train around 1,000 Afghan students in Kazakhstan universities. The first group of civilian graduates will soon successfully complete their education and join the peaceful reconstruction process in Afghanistan.
We support Afghanistan’s integration into regional structures. In 1992, Kazakhstan initiated the convening of the Conference on Interaction and Confidence Building Measures in Asia (CICA). The Conference has grown into a multi-national forum for enhancing cooperation and promoting peace, security and stability in Asia. I am confident that, in the near future, we will be able to strengthen it so it becomes an Organization for Security and Development in Asia. This will further contribute to Asia’s regional security architecture. We are happy that Afghanistan is already an active member while the U.S. has an observer status in the CICA process.
Ladies and gentlemen, the geographical position of Central Asia and the recent rise in tensions has raised fears that it could become an arena again for a new “Great Game”. Kazakhstan firmly believes instead it should be seen as theplatform for a “Great Gain” – a place where interests converge rather than collide. This requires everyone to replace a “zero sum” mentality with a “win-win” approach in which economic cooperation benefits all and provides the base to build widespread trust and prosperity.
This is exactly how we seethe Eurasian Economic Union (EEU). Now ratified by all three countries, the Treaty will come into force on Jan. 1, 2015. The EEU will be formed through the merger of existing structures – the Customs Union and the Common Economic Space – enabling us to simplify the governance process.
Early next year Kazakhstan will also join the WTO – a step that will further accelerate our growth and integration into the global market.
At the same time, Kazakhstan has deepened its relationship with the European Union. Next year, we will become the first Central Asian state to sign an Enhanced Partnership and Cooperation Agreement (EPCA) with Brussels.
This identifies no less than 29 sectors for increased cooperation and, in many respects, is similar to the Association Agreement signed between Ukraine and the EU.
From all of this you can see that we are gradually transforming Kazakhstan from a “land-locked” to a “land-linked”nation.
Our Government has also been working hard to encourage foreign direct investment.
So this year, we have introduced new tax exemptions for foreign investors – from corporation tax and land tax for 10 years and from property tax for 8 years. On top of these exemptions, the Government is ready to provide an investment subsidy – in the form of reimbursement of up to 30% of capital costs by the state once a production facility is operating.
We have also eased the process of bringing foreign educated and highly-skilled labor into the country. All foreign companies now have the right to deploy their own specialists for the period of the investment project and up to one year after its commissioning. No additional permissions or quotas are required.
And most importantly – as of June 2014, citizens of the top 10 investor countries, including the United States, can travel to Kazakhstan without a visa for stays of up to 15 days.
We have gone further, uniquely, with the US in this area. Both Kazakh and American citizens can now obtain 5-year, multi-entry visas. Already thousands of our citizens have benefited from this arrangement.
The next big step we see for ourselves is to establish direct flights between our big cities. We are starting this week the negotiations between our two civil aviation regulatory agencies.
***
Ladies and gentlemen, these ties and initiatives highlight the strong, dynamic and enduring strategic partnership between our two countries. This now goes back 22 years when the United States was the first country to establish its diplomatic presence in Kazakhstan. From these beginnings, the scope of our relationship has expanded and strengthened in all directions.
We have worked together and continue to do so in the field of nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, through the Nunn-Lugar Counter Threat Reduction Program. Our Presidents meet at the Nuclear Security Summits to keep the global agenda in this area moving forward.
Our leaders also regularly hold conversations on other global and regional issues, as well. The convergence of our interests and shared goals has brought about unprecedented cooperation on regional and global security, economics and trade, science and technology, clean energy, and counterterrorism. By establishing the Strategic Partnership Dialogue, we are showing our determination to continue deepening U.S.-Kazakhstan political and economic engagement. As part of this process, I and Secretary Kerry will co-chair the 3rdmeetingofthe Strategic Partnership Dialogue today.
Economically, the links are strong and growing. The United States continues to be a leading investor with over $26 billion in the Kazakh economy. Last year the trade turnover between our countries increased by 9%. But we firmly believe that there is potential for a great deal more co-operation.
As you may know Kazakhstan is preparing for EXPO 2017 in Astana, with the featured theme of “Future Energy”. We hope it will serve as a catalyst for greater dialogue and collaborative solutions to energy challenges. We look forward to seeing a U.S. national pavilion there and I want to encourage American companies to take part.
Energy issues are regularly discussed at the meetings of the U.S.-Kazakhstan Energy Partnership Commission. In June the 10th meeting was held during the visit of U.S. Deputy Secretary of Energy Dan Poneman to Astana.
We look forward as well to advancing our Science and Technologydialogue through the Joint Commission we established last year. The Kazakh Ministry of Education and Science is already putting together a team of experts for a 2nd Meeting of the Commission to be held here in Washington next summer.
One of the most active participants of this Joint Commission is Nazarbayev University. It has established relationships with a number of American universities, such as Carnegie Mellon, Duke, Pittsburgh and Harvard Universities. With these partnerships and by actively participating in the S/T Commission, the NU is building its academic and research potential in biotechnology, energy, seismology, water resources management, IT-technology and environmental protection.
I am also happy to mention the growing ties between our Defense Agencies. They are now implementing the 3rdFive-year Cooperation Plan. Its main focus is on training and equipping Kazakh peacekeeping and special units, military education and joint exercises. Kazakhstan seeks partnership with the U.S. defense companies and support of the Pentagon to develop its defense industry.
***
To conclude my remarks, I want to repeat that we see the Kazakhstan-American strategic partnership as absolutely invaluable to our development and security. We believe as well that Kazakhstan has proved to be a reliable strategic partner and a responsible stakeholder in regional and global affairs. We are determined to continue working shoulder-to-shoulder with the U.S. on our many shared priorities,
I am proud of the Kazakhstan’s progress over the past years and am grateful to all our partners who invested politically, economically and intellectually in Kazakhstan along the way. The United States has been and is a true friend on our journey.
We in Kazakhstan appreciate this and are ready to work to make our Partnership even stronger.
And what follows is the agreed upon Joint Statement by the United States and Kazakhstan, issued on December 10, 2014:
10 December 2014
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesperson
Washington, D.C.
December 10, 2014
Joint Statement of the Third U.S.–Kazakhstan Strategic Partnership Dialogue
On December 10, 2014, Kazakhstani Foreign Minister Erlan Idrissov paid an official visit to the United States. During his visit, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Foreign Minister Idrissov co-chaired the third meeting of the Strategic Partnership Dialogue.
During the meeting the two sides recognized the significant progress that has been made in the bilateral relationship since the inaugural Strategic Partnership Dialogue was held in Washington, April 9-10, 2012. The two sides highlighted the robust and growing bilateral ties between Kazakhstan and the United States and reaffirmed their commitment to further deepen the strategic partnership. The United States expressed its unwavering support for Kazakhstan’s independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity as Kazakhstan marks the 23rd anniversary of its independence on December 16. The wide-ranging discussions on bilateral and regional issues in the Strategic Partnership Dialogue included the following:
Partnership on Global Issues
Kazakhstan and the United States are committed to sharing their experience on how to address the most pressing global and regional problems. Kazakhstan and the United States agreed that ISIL poses an immediate threat to the people of Iraq and the entire region. Kazakhstan and the United States confirmed their commitment to strengthen cooperation on global counterterrorism and counternarcotics issues. The United States welcomed Kazakhstan’s initiative to convene the 5th Congress of Leaders of World and Traditional Religions, June 10-11, 2015, in Astana. Kazakhstan expressed its willingness to host P5+1 talks with Iran on the Iranian nuclear program and encourages all parties to continue negotiations in a constructive manner in order to reach a comprehensive arrangement in 2015. The United States appreciates its open dialogue with Kazakhstan on the crisis in Ukraine and welcomed Kazakhstan’s contribution to the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine and its commitment to provide economic assistance to Ukraine. The United States expressed its appreciation for Kazakhstan’s contribution to the United Nations Ebola Emergency Response.
Nonproliferation
Kazakhstan and the United States reaffirmed their shared commitment to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Threat reduction and nonproliferation remain important pillars of our joint efforts to ensure global and regional security. Kazakhstan welcomed the signing by the United States and other nuclear-weapon states of the Protocol to the Central Asian Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty in May 2014 and encourages the United States to ratify it in the near future. Kazakhstan and the United States both look forward to a successful Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in 2015 and intend to pursue consensus on practical and balanced steps to strengthen the Treaty. The United States confirmed its readiness to consult with Kazakhstan on its interest in membership on the IAEA Board of Governors, and welcomed Kazakhstan’s continued interest in membership in the Missile Technology Control Regime, the Australia Group, and the Wassenaar Arrangement. The United States praised Kazakhstan’s continued collaboration on security, safeguards, and disposition of nuclear materials and is pleased to support Kazakhstan’s efforts to establish a regional Nuclear Security Training Center in Kazakhstan. The United States continues to support Kazakhstan’s offer to host an IAEA Low-Enriched Uranium Bank. Both sides plan to continue their cooperation on the rehabilitation of the former Semipalatinsk Nuclear Test Site and on establishing the Central Reference Laboratory in Almaty.
Democracy, Human Rights, and Development
Kazakhstan and the United States reaffirmed the importance of democratic development and respect for human rights, which include efforts to strengthen representative institutions such as independent media and local self-government. Both sides acknowledged the importance of a vibrant and varied civil society. The United States welcomed the work of the Consultative and Advisory Body “Dialogue Platform on Human Dimension” launched by Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and non-governmental sector and encourages continued cooperation to enact recommendations made by this body.
Trade, Investment, and Energy
The United States reaffirmed its support for Kazakhstan’s membership in the World Trade Organization and its intention to continue to work with Kazakhstan to complete its accession process as soon as possible. Both sides place high importance on the intensification of bilateral trade and investment cooperation while respecting international commitments and standards. In particular, the United States and Kazakhstan intend to work together to support both the diversification of Kazakhstan’s non-oil sector and expansion of its role in global energy security as Kazakhstan pursues its 2050 Strategy. Kazakhstan and the United States plan to organize a business development mission to Kazakhstan in 2015 and to work together to establish a permanent dialogue to facilitate trade and economic cooperation. The two sides look forward to the Energy Partnership’s 11th Annual Meeting in 2015.
Afghanistan and Regional Integration
The United States welcomed Kazakhstan’s leadership role in supporting security in Afghanistan and the region, including Kazakhstan’s contribution to the Northern Distribution Network and its support for the Istanbul Process. The United States values Kazakhstan’s assistance to the Afghan National Security Forces and its $50 million scholarship program to educate one thousand Afghan students in Kazakhstan universities. The United States welcomed Kazakhstan’s economic connectivity efforts and, in particular, its contribution to the construction of four bridges in Samangan Province in Afghanistan, as well as its investments in regional infrastructure such as the Kazakhstan-Turkmenistan railroad and the Caspian seaport of Aktau. Kazakhstan and the United States intend to continue working closely together to support stability, peace, and prosperity in Afghanistan and the region.
Security and Law Enforcement Cooperation
Both sides affirmed their continued collaboration to expand law enforcement cooperation, including through the Memorandum of Cooperation between the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Kazakhstan’s Office of the Procurator General. Kazakhstan and the United States welcomed the initialing of the draft Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty in Criminal Matters and expect to have it ready for signing in 2015.
Military Cooperation
Kazakhstan and the United States are committed to strengthening military cooperation through capacity-building programs according to the Five-Year Military Cooperation Plan. Priority programs include professionalization of the Kazakhstani Armed Forces, expansion of its non-commissioned officer corps, modernization of its Professional Military Education system, and U.S. support for Kazakhstan’s peacekeeping deployment capability through the annual military exercise Steppe Eagle.
Education, Science and Technology Partnership, People-to-People Contacts
Kazakhstan and the United States affirmed their commitment to increase educational exchanges. The United States is committed to expanding opportunities for Kazakhstanis to study and train in the United States, including through the Future Leaders Exchange (FLEX) and Fulbright Programs, and to continuing U.S. investment in English-language training to support Kazakhstan’s vision of becoming a trilingual society. The United States and Kazakhstan reaffirmed their commitment to strengthen scientific and technical cooperation among scientists, engineers, and students at research institutes and in the private sector in the context of the Joint Commission on Science and Technology, which is to reconvene in 2015 in Washington. The United States looks forward to working with Kazakhstan when it becomes the new host for the International Science and Technology Center in 2015. Kazakhstan and the United States noted with satisfaction that thousands of Kazakhstani and U.S. citizens have benefited from the introduction in 2013 of five-year visas for Kazakhstanis visiting the United States and the elimination of Kazakhstan’s visa requirements for U.S. investors and tourists on brief visits to Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan and the United States affirmed their commitment to increase people-to-people contacts between the countries in recognition of the importance of these links to strengthening our partnership.
Development and Humanitarian Assistance
The United States welcomed Kazakhstan’s efforts to establish a national system of official development assistance, KazAID, which should strengthen Kazakhstan’s efforts to assist other countries in the region. The United States looks forward to continuing and, as appropriate, expanding its joint program with Kazakhstan to leverage USAID’s capacity to contribute to Kazakhstan’s development goals.
EXPO-2017
Kazakhstan encourages U.S. private companies in the sphere of renewable energy and energy efficiency to participate in EXPO-2017. The United States praised Kazakhstan’s efforts to promote international cooperation on sustainable energy and climate change through EXPO-2017, as well as through initiatives such as the “Green Bridge Partnership Program.”
The Royal Australian Air Force is in the throes of significant modernization.
As I wrote during my visit earlier this year to Australia about the process of change:
The Aussies entered the 21st century with an aging Air Force. The silver lining in that difficult position is that as the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) began to modernize, they could do so within the context of new 21st century capabilities.
The process really began by adding the C-17, which was at the end of its production run, but introduced a new lift capability for the force. The reach, range and lift performance of the aircraft was important for the Afghan engagement, but will become a key asset as the Aussies focus primarily on Pacific defense.
The new A330MRTT tanker is the next piece. The impact of the tanker, which is refuelable, will be significant in allowing the Aussies (individually and in terms of coalition contributions) to engage with extended reach, range and endurance in the Pacific.
A Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) F/A-18F Super Hornet prepares to refuel mid-air from a RAAF KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport over Iraq. CreditL Australian MOD, 11/26/14
And operating in extended reach and range to protect the borders of Australia, to operate within the strategic quadrangle from Japan, to Guam, to Singapore and to Australia, will be new aircraft able to manage the battlespace with 360 degree extended reach.
The coming of the F-35 is a key piece of the re-set of airpower in Australia, but the air battle manger for the RAAF will be the new Wedgetail aircraft…..
It is clear that this is a new capability for Australia. And the squadron, which has a distinguished combat record, is approaching the aircraft with a sense of enthusiasm, adventure and willingness to explore new ways it might be used. The backgrounds of the squadron are diverse with navy and air force operators mixed in, and with a wide range of experience in airborne surveillance and battle management, including several years of operational experience with the RAF on the AWACS.
For an American who grew up from the 1950s and is used to the US introducing new systems first and then allies following, the Wedgetail is a whole new experience. When you visit Australia you get to see the E-10 we did not buy (Wedgetail) nor the A330MRTT tanker which we did not buy either.
This puts the Aussies in a rather odd situation whereby they are at the leading edge of 21st century changes, coupled with working with the USAF main contribution to this effort, the F-22.
With the RAAF self-deployment from Australia to engage in the air strikes against ISI, a visible change in capability is apparent, although not really noted in the United States.
To discuss this change and the way ahead for the RAAF, Air Vice-Marshal (Ret.) John Blackburn, now the Deputy Chairman of the influential Australian think tank, the Kokoda Foundation (as of January 2015 it will be called the Institute for Regional Security) and Deputy Chair at the Williams Foundation, was interview from Canberra.
I last talked with John when we were both in Rome for a joint seminar with the Italian Chief of Staff, for the Italian Air Force, Lt. General Preziosa.
A Royal Australian Air Force KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft returns in darkness and is brought to a halt by ground crew after another mission over Iraq as part of Operation Okra. Credit: Australian MOD, 11/22/14
Question: When you made your presentation in Rome, you highlighted Plan Jericho and the COS of the RAAF’s approach to transformation of the force.
But a reality already in place is that the RAAF is already in the swing of modernization.
A measure of progress is that the RAAF force which went from Australia to the Middle East, self-deployed.
With its own tankers and airlift, the RAAF strike force moved rapidly from Australia to support the ISIL allied strike.
Could you discuss the change already underway?
John Blackburn: Prior to the current modernization program, the RAAF would need several months warning time before they could assemble a strike force. And they did not have the logistic capability to support that force at long distance from Australia.
For example, the RAAF had C-130s and a small amount of B 707 tanking support which was in reality only a training capability.
Contrast that to today where in the current Middle East deployment, in a matter of weeks, the forces were able to respond rapidly and to deploy against the threat. And they have an ability to provide the complete logistical support as well to the force. The C-17 and the KC-30As have been crucial to this effort, and is why the government is seeking to acquire additional C-17s and KC-30As as well.
It is a mindset as well as capability change as well. In today’s world you are not going to have six months warning with that amount of time to respond. You need forces that can be gathered together rapidly and deployed as a package.
Our government wants to insert forces rapidly to deal with crises; not to have to wait for a long period to deploy. We don’t want to respond to the PM’s request to deploy with: “Call us in six months, and we will let you know when we are on our way. Governments want real options; not a recorded message .”
Question: In other words, you are enhancing your expeditionary force capability prior to the arrival of the F-35, which can then provide significant ISR, and C2 capabilities to work with the force?
John Blackburn: The RAAF has always had to be expeditionary given the size of Australia.
Moving from airbases on the East Coast of Australia to the Northern territories is more than four hours. But with the new equipment, and the changes in readiness levels and training we can expand the Air Force’s range and capability to support expeditionary operations.
The RAAF are now looking at how not just to modernize the force; but to transform it. They are looking at the F-35 as a key to that effort. It is not a replacement airplane; it is a force for transformation. The focus is not just the airplane or its systems but the impact upon, and the transformation of, the whole force. This transformation will be guided by the RAAF’s Plan JERICHO.
The Air Force is anticipating already some of these transformatonal changes as a result of the radar and systems in the Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft; however, the F-35 is a whole new concept and level.
Question: Looking back, the challenges, which the Australian forces faced in the East Timor operation in 1999, were clearly a turning point in rethinking your way ahead.
Could you speak to that transition point?
John Blackburn: East Timor was a regional security crisis of the sort that Australians saw themselves as being able to lead and to support a coalition force. However ,the experience was an eye opener, it was a mindset change.
The scale of the operation clearly challenged our ability to ramp up and sustain the forces throughout the operation.. It triggered a mindset shift in terms of a defense force that was training in order to be ready to do something one day, to a defense force that has to be able to do something “now.”
A part of that mindset change which resonates with the RAAF today is that they are not waiting until the F-35 shows up to figure out how to transform the force. When the JSF enters service, they are going to need to be able to employ the JSF from day 1.. Rapid insertion forces clearly are becoming a key toolset for our political leaders.
Royal Australian Air Force KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport aircraft maintenance crew prepare to launch the jet at dusk, commencing another mission refuelling Coalition aircraft over Iraq. Credit: Australian MOD, 11/24/14
Question: What will be the perception impact on other allies of Australian shaping a modern self-deployment capability?
John Blackburn: With regard to the United States, the US is always carrying the heavy load.. What you are seeing now is that allies are seeking acquisition of lift and tanking to have more capability to self deploy for their own needs and also to be more effective allies with the US or for each other.
The fact that many allies are buying the F-35 and are likely to think along similar lines as the RAAF are about transformation could well lead to a situation where the capabilities of allies will become proportionally greater.
It is important to examine where coalition airpower can go by 2030 under the influence of the twin forces of growing capability of core allies to self deploy and the combat capability of a fifth generation led force.
Question: How will the RAAF look to integrate platforms such as the Growler and the F-35?
The discussion in the United States often views these as polar opposite platforms, and the RAAF is the only force other than the USN which will operate both.
What will be the approach?
John Blackburn: When Australia buys a system, it generally looks at the parent service, which has developed and deployed them.
This means the RAAF has a close relationship with the USN, with the Super Hornets, the Growlers and the P-8s to come.
With the coming of the F-35A the RAAF will work with the USAF and train at Luke AFB.
I expect that the RAAF will initially use the Growlers in a similar way to the USN does; however, as they gain experience I expect that new ways of integrating the Growlers, Super Hornets and JSFs will be developed.
These changes may in turn influence how the US Forces use their range of capabilities.
In perhaps a unique fashion we’re at the intersection of a set of relationships with U.S. Navy, the U.S. Air Force, the Marines.
This relationship is especially strong at the operator level where the innovations are clearly going to occur.
We will clearly tap into the US and allied F-35 community to drive change on how to integrate that change with overall force transformation.
For our Special Report on Australian defense modernization see the following:
Published on Nov 16, 2014 by Australian Ministry of Defence
Australia’s Air Task Group (ATG) consisting of six RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornets, an E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft and a KC-30A Multi-Role Tanker Transport aircraft continue to support Operation OKRA with missions in Iraq.
The ATG comprises around 400 RAAF personnel who have deployed to the Middle East.
Australia’s efforts are in response to a request for assistance by the Iraqi Government in combating ISIL terrorists.
Operation OKRA is the Australian Defence Force’s contribution to the international effort to combat the ISIL terrorist threat in Iraq. Australia’s contribution is being closely coordinated with the Iraqi government, Gulf nations and a broad coalition of international partners.
And the video at the top of the article shows the RAAF operating over the skies of Iraq.
The RAAF Air Task Group (ATG) has completed its first operational missions over Iraq. A RAAF E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) aircraft and KC-30A Multi Role Tanker Transport conducted missions on 1 October 2014 in support of coalition forces.
The E-7A conducted a support mission over central Iraq while the KC-30A conducted a support flight over Iraq.
The missions were completed without incident and the aircraft have returned safely to Australia’s main support base in the Middle East.
The ATG is operating within an Iraqi Government-approved and US-led international coalition assembled to disrupt and degrade the operations of ISIL. Australia’s efforts are in response to a request for assistance by the Iraqi Government in combating ISIL terrorists.
Credit: Australian Ministry of Defense
10/2/14
The following story published November 25, 2014 highlights one impact of the Australian engagement in the air operations against ISIL:
The discovery of a ‘hidden network of caves and bunkers’ occupied by the Islamic State in northern Iraq, by an Australian military plane, has led to an enormous airstrike and the death of over 100 terrorist fighters.
Vice-Admiral David Johnston, the chief of joint operations at the Department of Defence, revealed details of the successful multi-national airstrike during an operational update in Canberra on Tuesday.
He said that an Australian F-18 Super Hornet military plane, fitted with regular and heat-seeking night cameras, located the concealed bunkers and tunnels in a hillside at Kirkuk while monitoring movements on the mountain during the last week.
Within days a subsequent multi-national airstrike involving 20 aircraft attacked 44 targets, complimented by a large-scale ground operation that was led by the Kurdish security forces, that rapidly entered that area, cleared it of the remaining ISIL militants, and with some reporting indicating that over 100 ISIL fighters were killed in those clearance operations,’ Vice-Admiral Johnston said.
Another recent airstrike that was led by an Australian crew led to the ‘severe damage’ of a major improvised explosive device factory in Mosul.
For an update on the ATG published on the Australian MOD website see the following:
21st century warfare technologies concepts of operations and tactics and training are in evolution and revolution.
At the heart of reshaping US and allied approaches to airpower and its evolution is the emergence of the F-35, the significant impact which a global fleet of F-35s will have on US and allied capabilities and the approaches to leveraging other capabilities in the warfighting tool kit.
There is always the reactive enemy, so that the roll out of new approaches shaped by the impact of the F-35 will see reactions from various competitors and responding to these reactions will part of the re-set of evolving US and allied airpower and combat approaches.
The F-35 is at the heart of change for a very simple reason – it is a revolutionary platform, and when considered in terms of its fleet impact even more so.
The F-35, Lightning II, has a revolutionary sensor fusion cockpit that makes it effective in AA, AG and EW.
US and Allied Combat pilots will evolve and share new tactics and training, and over time this will drive changes that leaders must make for effective command and control to fight future battles.
An issue has been that the F-35 has been labeled a “fifth generation” aircraft, a sensible demarcation when the F-22 was being introduced.
But the evolution of the combat systems on the aircraft, the role of the fusion engine, and the impact of a fleet of integrated F-35s operating as a foundational element will make this term obsolete.
The global fleet of F-35s will be the foundation for a fundamental change in the way air power operates and with it overall combats concepts of operations for the US and allied insertion forces.
It is not an in and of itself platform; it is about what an integrated fleet of F-35s can deliver to TRANSFORM operations.
The decade ahead can be very innovative if what the fleet brings to the fight is learned and applied and the combat warriors leverage what they learn and then the application of those lessons to reshaping the force are applied.
As a senior RAF pilot involved with the F-35 program has put it well: “While much of the world still debates the existence of the F-35, we are moving rapidly forward to figure out how to use the aircraft and leverage it.”
At the heart of the transformation is the combination of two powerful trends: the emergence of Tron warfare and the forging of a combat cloud integrating combat capabilities.
The F-35 fleet operates at the cutting edge of both.
Part Three Begins:
The Impact of a Z Axis Air System on Combat
With the F-35 Cockpit Z-axis the key words are actually now embedded in the second half of his OODA –the words “decide, act.”
The quest for US way of war to always fight and win is to now embrace the entire spectrum of Boyd’s OODA by not questing for Situational Awareness, because that is only half way but rather everything should be now focused on developing technology, training tactics and C&C at all levels to empower “Situational Decisions.”
This is the true revolutionary step beyond just SA that the “z-axis” F-35 Fusion engine brings to the fight as a catalyst for a 21st Century refocused way of support equipping and training all Service joint con-ops.
I have been trying to formulate a way to expresses the human/machine evolving action/reaction cycle understanding that everything is always relative. “Beef” (an Air Command and Control Officer then at MAWRS) gave me the insight I needed to complete a year’s worth of research on ways to look at this dynamic.
Based on our discussions with Dean Ebert, (NGCO employee and former USMC EA-6 driver) I have been focused on the combat learning cycle associated with the new cockpit, the sensors in the aircraft and fusion prospects.
I seized on an MIT concept of the “engagement process of content” to understood how learning evolves. Similar to some of the thinking of Piaget, that one’s ability to learn evolves over time with age and learning, we now need to understand that learning in the cockpit powered by the fusion engine is not simply a linear repetitive experience. It is a learning experience and is done so within the fleet, both flying, just returned and about to engage.
In our very robust discussion with “Beef,” he added “in context” to the statement and clarified the approach. We are now not talking about Situational Awareness as the key dynamic but Situational Decisions.
A foundation for “fifth generation” operations realize is built around the notion of learning rapidly in a combat situation and acting on that knowledge.
The engagement process of content in context empowers dynamic situational decisions at all levels and gives the fighting force the best chance of prevailing.
The “engagement process of content in battle context” which empowers dynamic situational decision making at all levels has the best chance of prevailing. It is the foundation of war winning in the 21st century.
And the discussion with “Beef” highlighted an important clarification in another sense. Instead of confusing folks with C5ISR and with situational awareness, we should focus on C2 plus information war.
Pilots in the F-35 are Information Warriors. A fleet of F-35s puts in the air with a 360 degree swath a decision and information warfare grid. This grid is leveraged throughout the battlespace for ground and surface operations throughout the engagement.
Adding “Beef” to MAWTS a 7202 –and going back to using the term “Information War” (I used that term in Red Dragon Rising published in 1999) actually brings more clarity than just “cyber” which is a critical subset. Combat leaders can now focus on Command and Control plus information war. Pilots in the F-35 are Information Warriors.
A fleet of F-35s puts in the air with a 360 degree swath a decision and information warfare grid.
This grid is leveraged throughout the battlespace for ground and surface operations throughout the engagement.
As Mike Skaff the father of the F-35 cockpit states:
The Z axis and the fusion engine graphic captures the essence of the change, or the foundation from which change will occur.
It points out the advent of the information age.
We’re old enough, and we can remember when there weren’t cell phones. There was a time when there wasn’t an Internet. We can remember that distinctly.
When these tools show up in the early ’90s, there’s a paradigm shift that we call ‘the information age’, and now it arrives in the airplane. With the F-35 we enter into the information age in a new way and we can connect these airplanes just like nodes of the Internet. I’m not saying we’re connected to the Internet, but it is like that. I like to think of this as information dominance. When a 5th generation fighter arrives in battle space the pilot has information dominance.
The F-35 was specifically designed to provide the pilot with information dominance through multi-spectral, multi-sensor, distributed processing and advanced fusion – this is the distinction and the difference from the 4th generation. This is the paradigm shift.
Because this is software-defined plane built around evolution over time, we know the future is going to be different. The threats will evolve and everything else.
But initially, these initial airplanes have all of the hardware in place to last for a couple of software upgrades. And so, we can redefine the airplane in its missions and how the sensors work and what they detect. Hypersonic cruise missiles, seeing that the horizon maybe with DAS, who knows what is the next evolution, but we know it is coming. And the plane is built to anticipate change.
Recently a Marine Corps general underscored that we are not making this airplane for Harrier pilots. In fact, most F-35 pilots haven’t been born yet.
You’re making it for the next generation. And they’re going to jump into the cockpit and they’re going to see a Nintendo or a PlayStation or whatever is the deal at that time.
But they’re not like us old guys that are looking for air speed, altitude, conventional electro-mechanical gauges. They literally see a video console in front of them, and we’ve got to make the airplane for them. They can deal with information and they can process it differently than you and I can….
It is also about survivability in an information dominance environment. By reducing the gaggle of aircraft to an interactive air system with other combat assets, we can pursue air dominance against a reactive enemy. It will be a different paradigm leveraging the Z-axis to pursue information dominance.
Dealing with the Hypersonic Missile Threat
An example of how to leverage the Z-axis for a fleet of F-35s will be seen in the game of tracking hypersonic cruise missiles.
The PLA military threat in numbers and quality is growing, PLA is generic for all Army, Navy, AF and missile forces.
So it is now time to accept that a war-changing weapon is in late stages of R&D and it must be accounted for in any battle plan.
Unlike distant “hyper-sonic” R&D efforts such a Global Strategic Strike -a hypersonic cruise missile is a rapid evolving technology, which sooner than later will be demonstrating the art of the possible up close and personal. Such a revolutionary CM in the US arsenal is a very good thing. In the hands of PLA forces it is a very real “wolf at the door.”
Consequently when, not if, a hypersonic-Cruise Missile is battle ready the Air/Sea Battle staff will have to figure out both offensive and defensive con-ops. In sufficient numbers a hypersonic Cruise Missile can be a war-tipping asset. Employed by US and Allied forces the capability will greatly enable a deadly combat punch. If it is in the hands of an enemy a hypersonic Cruise Missile is a ship killer.
Since defeating a hyper-sonic cruise missile is the hardest problem focusing on that will have the added benefit of addressing less capable weapons-such as the new PLAAF 5th Gen J-20.
US and allied forces will have the perfect aircraft in the F-35 to play both offensive and defense when hypersonic Cruise Missiles become a combat reality. The C4ISR-D “Z-axis” in the cockpit can lead the way in developing a Pacific “honeycomb” ISR Grid to handle the hyper-sonic Cruise Missile threat and also go on the offensive since Chinese President Hu Jintao has just put the PLAN on combat alert.
Everything will take time to develop and if PRC goes to war at Sea today they will lose. However, time is precious for US and Allies to get the technology for a 21st Century Air/Sea Battle right.
If the F-35 did not exist with it’s revolutionary “Z-axis” 360 umbrella —it would have to be invented to take on directing all current and future weapons, such as ship-board lasers for example against the possibility of PLA hypersonic ship killing cruise missiles and other threats.
Northern Edge validated that the US has developed a flying combat system that is world class and unique—a Fighter/Attack aircraft with EW/”tron” warfare capability with both AA and AG kinetic weapons in the bay.
American visionary commanders and operators given enough F-35s will have the beginning of a real honeycomb defense. F-35 cockpit enabled sensors linked with other combat systems networked because no platform will fight alone and employing the Wynne Doctrine-“If you are in a fair fight someone failed in planning,” – it s formula for combat success.
A hypersonic rocket launches skyward during a March 22, 2010 test launch from the Woomera Test Range in Australia. The fight was part of the joint U.S.-Australian HiRise project to test and develop hypersonic vehicles for future aircraft transportation.Credit: Australia Defense Science and Technology Organisation
Such new concepts enabled by F-35 A (USAF), B (USMC) and C (USN) as Aegis can be a “wingman” and an SSGN Submarine can be a “fire support ship” is the touchstone for winning an Air/Sea Battle.
The C4ISR-D (for decision) F-35 cockpit should be the R&D focal point for developing the next generation of weapons. Designing electromatic magnetic hardened (EMP) systems, platforms and weapons to take full advantage of the unique emerging F-35 C4ISR combat capability is the way ahead.
If the F-35 did not exist with it’s world class “Z-axis” 360 umbrella —it would have to be invented to take on future PLA hypersonic ship killing cruise missiles and other threats.
Northern Edge validated that the US has something world class and unique—a long range 360 search, and sort information system in a Fighter/Attack aircraft that will has both EW/”tron” warfare capability and kinetic AA and AG weapons in the bay.
A successful Pacific Rim fleet wide “honeycomb” ISR grid can be created with enough USAF/USN/USMC and Allied F-35s flying along the Pacific Rim. F-35’s in the Japanese self-defense Force are extremely important along with Australia, Singapore and South Korea.
US and Allied con-ops can begin to offensively link the DAS capability to hypersonic CMs in the hands of the good guys-. –Imagine an F-35 lights up a threat and then out pops a hypersonic CM from an SSGN or a Zumwalt (DDG-1000) class (all two of them) or an Arleigh Burke (DDG-51) surface combatant, or is launched from many different USAF air platforms both piloted and UCAS.
Equally important the F-35 “Z-axis” mitigates the “wasting asset” argument being made against our Fleet. The Fleet Commander will have tremendous situational awareness (SA) to defend against enemy hypersonic CMs, and also IRBMs end game maneuvering warheads.
In that game instantaneous speed of light information originating from cockpits in a fleet of F-35s is a real game changer. From point of launch to possible impact the Navy Fleet employing a 1600+ diameter DAS capability can begin to figure out how to network all fleet “weapons” to kill, jam, fry or spoof incoming hypersonic CMs and endgame maneuvering IRBM. R&D efforts in directed energy research would add to the mix of weapons to employ.
Essentially, the Commander and all operators will have the best SA knowledge possible to successfully track the flight path from launch to endgame maneuvering. Early detection just like fighting an aggressive cancer is a life savor.
If the F-35 did not exist the Air/Sea Battle Commanders would have to continue to invent or improve a lot of expensive disparate systems to do what one aircraft can accomplish-no platform fights alone is a winning strategy.
The F/A-18 -in fact no system in the world, can do what I just described. The critical point is taking advantage of the “Z-axis” is to build new weapons. The Navy and AF armaments commands now have a combat survivable aircraft that can “tron” track the threat.
Weapons and systems can be developed that enhance EW offensive capabilities against incoming missiles and also target them with kinetic weapons internally carried and from other platforms. Hopefully some day lasers will also come to the fight all to kill the hypersonic threat before it gets close to its end game maneuvering.
The F-35 initially will be network to other systems but realistically the “other systems” should begin to evolve toward taking advantage of F-35 SA potential-not the other way around and over time this will happen.
The S-Cubed Revolution
Inherent in the discussion of dealing with the coming hypersonic missile threat is the ability to being at the cutting edge of the S cubed revolution. Sensors, combined with stealth combined with speed can provide a new paradigm for shaping the Pacific force necessary for the U.S. in working in the Pacific.
At the heart of getting the policy agenda right is to understand that warfare is highly interactive.
Buying, building and deploying yesterday’s technologies against evolving threats is a sure fire way of being in the wrong side of the outcome.
As Lt. General Walsh, then Deputy Commanding General, Marine Corps Combat Development Command, put it succinctly in a presentation:
Some say that the development of modern anti-access, area denial threats make an amphibious assault impossible.
That has been said before and it was not true then and it is not true now.
The challenge is to leverage the asymmetric advantages we have in functions like ISR, precision first, and seabasing.
The challenge is to use the sea as a maneuver space in the context of the modern threat.
We don’t need to give up on the capability.
We need to think our way through the challenge.
What Walsh was hinting it is what we would call the S cubed evolution or revolution of capabilities. Sensors, stealth and speed can come together to create a powerful distributed force in the Pacific, which can so complicate Chinese military planning as to enhance deterrence significantly.
A deployed fleet of F-35s – allied and American – in the Pacific lay down a strong stealth and sensor-enabled honeycomb of deployed kinetic and non-kinetic capabilities. The reach of the fleet is such that a 21st century equivalent of the World War II big blue blanket can be created.
The F-35 has been built to be a fleet, not a silver bullet.
As Lt. General Schmidle, the former Deputy Commandant of Aviation commented with regard to the flexibility and coverage, which the Bs can bring to a theater of operation like the Pacific:
I think that we’re going to find ourselves in a situation where we, the Marine Corps, are going to be able to offer much more to the joint force in terms of capability.
And as General Hostage put it to me, Marine Corps assets will be considered an integrated part of the joint force, in a way he has not thought of it before.
The Air Force Commander will look at USMC or USN F-35s as part of his F-35 fleet from the perspective of the joint fight.
And General Hostage, the former ACC Commander, underscored the air combat cloud role of the fifth generation aircraft operating as a fleet.
The advantage of the F-35 is the nature of the global fleet. Allied and American F-35s, whether USAF, USN, or USMC, can talk with one another and set up the distributed operational system.
Such a development can allow for significant innovation in shaping the air combat cloud for distributed operations in support of the Joint Force Commander.
Other sensor capabilities will be provided by evolving robotic capabilities, under the sea, on the sea and in the air.
Another game-changing capability of the 5th generation aircraft is the platform’s ability to function within a wolf pack, utilizing all of the deployed assets for control of 360 degree space. (Credit: Bigstock)
The concept of an operating wolf pack whereby robotic elements outside of the fleet and inside the planes themselves will make a stealth-sensors dynamic as a solid foundation for the weapons revolution.
We are currently putting 3rd and 4th generation weapons on 5th generation aircraft.
This makes little sense.
With a plane that can see significantly further than the weapons it carries can operate, the capabilities of the plane are being limited by the past, rather than enabling a new strike enterprise future.
But the link to the third S – speed – is offboarding of weapons is what I wish to highlight here.
Offloading of weapons will be a fundamental opportunity posed by the 5th generation aircraft.
The former Chief of Staff of the Air Force, General Schwartz spoke prior to his departure of F-22s training to guide Tomahawk missiles off of surface ships to their targets.
Our testing last year of an F22 in-flight, retargeting a tomahawk cruise missile that was launched from a U.S. Navy submarine, is an example of how we are moving closer to this joint pre-integration under our Air-Sea Battle concept.
The F-35 has a 360-degree situational awareness and data delivery capability.
This poses the possibility of leveraging the 360-degree space to guide weapons to their targets.
Target acquisition onboard does not have to be married to weapons CARRIED on board.
This means as well that classic distinctions between tactical fighters doing close air support, or air superiority missions or air defense missions are clearly blurred.
The fleet flies and identifies targets for the various mission sets and can guide weapons to a diversity of target sets.
The reach of the fleet is the key to the operation of the fleet, not the range of individual aircraft.
Shaping a new distributed operational capability when added to the coming revolution in speed will provide the US with a range of options to deal with global threats, including any presumed advantages of the Chinese area denial strategy.
Conclusions: Laying a Foundation for Crafting a 21st Century Air Combat Approach
The F-35, Lightning II, has a revolutionary sensor fusion cockpit that makes it effective in AA, AG and EW, consequently, US and Allied Combat pilots will evolve and share new tactics and training, and over time this will drive changes that leaders must make for effective command and control to fight future battles.
The F-35 adds an “electronic” or “tron” warfare component to the fight, an “E” for electronic. It is not necessary to designate the F-35 as the F/A/E-35 but that would be more accurate. Adding the “E” with both active and passive capabilities is changing the entire strategic and tactical dynamic combat aviation
The F-35 with its “F” “A” and “E” role in same airframe will be a focal point for pulling those elements together for the American way of war that “no platform fights alone.”
Passive capability of F-35 sensors will revolutionize strike operations and force innovative strategic Command and Control thinking.
Imagine squadrons of F-35s in a strike package, F-35As taking off from land, the B model from USS America, F-35C Squadrons from USS Gerald Ford all attacking stealth enabled and relying on passive sensing on an emcon mission. Add allies flying the F-35 and the first time the enemy knows they are under attack is when the bombs and missiles impact.
Stealth enabled “passive” sensing with reach not just range will add a revolutionary step-function in combat effectiveness –both in intelligence gathering and strike–the nexus between reach in collecting identifying and then having a commander prioritize “aim-points” to execute passive integrated attack strike vectors is a joint capability that no other combat force other than US and Allied empower by F-35 A/F/E in the world will have for at least a decade or more–PLAAF and Russian Stealth do not have fusion cockpits J-31 does not have passive capability.
Just like Wade McClusky seeing a Japanese wake as to the position of the targeted Carriers, often signals-in-space have the ability to give away positions, the F-35 may have a battle winning way to avoid giving away its position, along with its basing location, because of both stealth and the very long reach of its passive sensing.
F-22 Raptors from the 94th Fighter Squadron, Joint Base Langley-Eustis, Virginia, and F-35A Lightning IIs from the 58th Fighter Squadron, Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, fly in formation after completing an integration training mission over the Eglin Training Range, Florida, Nov. 5, 2014. The purpose of the training was to improve integrated employment of fifth-generation assets and tactics. The F-35s and F-22s flew offensive counter air, defensive counter air and interdiction missions, maximizing effects by employing fifth-generation capabilities together. (U.S. Air Force photo/Master Sgt. Shane A. Cuomo)
Just like the F-111 El-Dorado Canyon strike an “emcon” strike, stealth enabled, can come as a complete surprise.
The possibility will exist for the US Intelligence Community to capture information “seen” both active or passive by US and Allied F-35s and all other ISR sensors, to create a dynamic almost real time library of future “aim-points” for attack in the event of hostilities–this building of a library can occur without any opponent knowing what US and its allies know.
The F-35 OODA “DA” fusion cockpit will shift all US combat planning and engagement eventually into a horizontal grid vice reliance on only Hub Spoke battle management-this evolving attribute will change C&C in very profound ways and this is could be a good starting point for any “Combat Cloud” discussion.
If the F-35 did not exist it would either have to be invented or many different technologies would have to be aggregated to even try and achieve what the aircraft can do–and that effort would have exploitable seams, and an increased C&C demand with an increased vulnerability to enemy “tron” counter measures.
Going active F-35 can engage in combat as USAF Secretary Mike Wynne says empowering another revolutionary capability—a “sensor/shooter” dynamic engaged with legacy systems. Dynamically using fifth generation aircraft as target location systems may not be seen as satisfying to the traditionally trained pilots, but it can serve a vital role for forward observers in concealed locations.
The F-35 is not in direct competitions with Growler, E-2 and AWACS it will just drive combat innovation especially using its EW capability on the emerging Virtual/Constructive Fallon range–technology, training and tactics will come together in perfect harmony to allow Squadron Pilots and Commanders the environment to innovate dynamically and to “train, train, train,”—- no opponent in the world has this capability.
The use of Growler Electronic strike as part of an air wing strike package along with AWACS, E-2s and surface ship enhanced C&C can empower F-35C s in its non-stealth mode. The design factor of ever increasing F-35 airframe payload utility/accuracy can be embraced by taking advantage of the tremendous weapon load carried on F-35 hard points and utilizing the F-35 “fusion” cockpit to identify with precision accuracy hitting all types of ground targets.
The “E'” capability of F-35 can augment the Growler “tron” warfare capability.
However, if the tactical situation requires it, the F-35 can attack in stealth/passive mode or after the beginning of air superiority with successful SEAD the F-35 can attack with slung wall-to-wall ordinance relying its “tron” or electronic counter-measure capability. The ability of the Strike Commander to mix and match his con-ops in battle has increased immeasurably. And clearly flying with the F-22 will enhance this overall capability as well.
Just like the example of the Israeli Air Force flying F-4s and attending “Top Gun” the F-35 will allow tactical innovations to take place in many Allied fighting forces and the training and sharing will make all countries combat forces better.
Tracking Hypersonic Cruise Missiles with instantaneous speed of light information originating from cockpits in a fleet of F-35s is a real game changer. From the point of launch to possible impact the Navy Fleet employing a 1600+ miles diameter DAS capability can begin to figure out how to kill, jam, fry or spoof incoming hypersonic CMs and endgame maneuvering IRBMs. If the F-35 did not exist the US Navy to protect their ships would have to invent it.
The other attribute of an F-35C strike force and especially with the addition of the USS Gerald Ford is not only will the aviation Strike Force be an integrated combat air wing but the air wing and carrier will be uniformly integrated with the entire Navy and Allied assets, air land and sea. This is an additional factor that can be explored on the Fallen Virtual/Constructive Range.
S-cubed airborne considerations with trade-offs between sensors, stealth and speed is a way ahead for new weapons being developed.
By laying a foundation for a strategic transition in the operation of airpower other changes can be facilitated.
As the new head of ACC, and former PACAF chief has highlighted that the F-35 as a fleet in the Pacific can allow his successors as PACAF to think in terms of a CAOC and not simply in terms of flying capabilities to be linked in a CAOC. This means working the 4th to 5th generation concepts of operations, and working various strike and defensive assets into an integrated whole as seen from a C2 perspective.
General Hawk Carlisle, then commander, Air Forces Pacific sits with AFN-Pacific Hawaii News Bureau, to get the general’s thoughts and messages on the state of Air Forces in the Pacific. Credit: Defense Media Activity, Hawaii News Bureau, 4/613
For example, in an interview with “Hawk” Carlisle conducted earlier this year, the then head of the US Pacific AF highlighted this opportunity:
Command and control are two words.
The way ahead is clearly a distributed force integrated through command and control whereby one develops distributed mission tactical orders (with well understood playbooks) reflecting the commander’s directions and then to have the ability to control the assets to ensure that the sensors and shooters accomplish their mission.
Shaping an integrated enterprise is not a futuristic mission for the integration of Patriots, Aegis and THAAD is already a work in progress, but General Carlisle sees the approach getting better over time as new systems come to the Pacific, including a fleet of allied and US F-35s.
We need to get better at attack operations to take out the shooter.
How do we do that better?
It is clear that an F-35 fleet coupled with the new long range strike systems will play a key role in that function.
We also need to shape game changers in terms of the missiles used to intercept missiles.
The current generation is expensive and we need to drive down the cost point for interceptors.
SM-6 is coming which is an important asset but DOD is working hard on ways to drive down the cost of future interceptors.
And we are working the passive defense piece of the puzzle as well including hardening, concealment, dispersal of assets, rapid runway repair and support for a fluid force operating in a distributed manner.
Secretary Wynne likened what will be set in motion by deploying an F-35 fleet and the learning curve with regard to Tron Warfare as something akin to the WW I aviators learning how to shoot bullets through the propellers – which was hardly a quick or easy learning path.
It is clear that learning how to leverage the F-35 global fleet to fight and win in the Tron Warfare domain will help lay the foundation for the next generation of weapons as well. As Secretary Wynne commented on an earlier draft of this paper:
“I looked for the likely path of growth in ‘Tron’ warfare and the challenge may well be to bring the Cyber Domain into the fight; and integrating an electronic gun; with laser or microwave style emission into the transmit for sharing; or the fire for effect mechanism for blinding or burning incoming strike assets.”
The technology described exists it just requires the political will to appropriate enough money to both acquire enough and constantly “train train train.” Squadron pilots and Commanders in all communities will learn as they go.
Future combat success has the appropriate building blocks; the US combat philosophy of innovates, train, innovate, repeat, and repeat… is demonstrated in the sky every day. This is how it should be!
But with competitors like the Chinese and Russian clearly committing resources to the 21st century fight – in terms of technology, leadership and political will – the US and its allies can not simply squander away what could prove to be a decisive political advantage – namely building, deploying, training and leveraging a global US and allied F-35 fleet.
Some now are pushing a discussion of a 6th Gen aircraft. It might be prudent to allow the F-35 (F/A/E) to enter all US and Allied combat fleets to see how it evolves the air battle. The Lightning II is not a 5th Gen as defined by stealth it is actually the first generation of the American and Allied scientific, engineering and best military minds producing a new “axis” or design vector in combat aviation. It is the foundation for the next generation of air warfare, rather than simply being a fifth generation aircraft.
And the software upgradeability within the aircraft itself is part of evolving its ability to support the evolution of the “next” generation of warfare.
SLD: You will also have the opportunity from the standpoint of 2030 to take advantage of understanding what the impact of the F-35 will be on the fleet.
Rear Admiral Moran: Absolutely. That is a good point.
Joint strike fighter in my view is a revolutionary change to how we’re going to operate.
And we will evolve joint strike fighter once we get it in our hands and we learn to operate with it, and we truly understand its full potential. Once we get it out there and we start operating, we’re going to find out that we’re going to want to evolve this capability.
Hostage: The fifth generation aircraft will enable the air combat cloud and allow me to use my legacy assets differently.
Many of my 4th Generation fighters can be used to extend the network of linked systems providing reinforcing fires, and I can focus on the fifth generation assets as the core nodes shaping distributed joint capabilities.
And when we come to the evolution of “next” generation systems, the form factor could stay quite similar as we evolve the capabilities within the planes or in terms of how the flying systems can interact and operate together.
Rather than thinking of 6th generation aircraft in form factor terms, we can operate the new air combat cloud and leverage that moving forward.
The 21st USAF Secretary Mike Wynne and former head of DOD Acquisition at the time when the F-35 moved down a path to build out its fusion engine capabilities should have the last word:
The speed of transition for the US and allied forces is very dependent on the resources to both produce the F-35 and then for the subsequent training.
It is encouraging to see this as a top priority for all of the US and allied forces.
With the demanding world, this is an imperative, and thus gratifying to see this response.
If the drums of war are beginning, or if they remain quiescent for a period, fulfilling this imperative will have an impact.
With both Russia and China making ominous moves against America especially with military modernization initiatives and force projection it is time for a deterrence response.
The F-35 production line can be doubled and over a period of time doubled again. If the US can be the WW II Arsenal of Democracy, and then produce thousands of F-4s and then F-16s there is no reason except lack of political will power to increase the production rate of F-35s for the US and its Allies.
And this about getting on with it and making a fundamental transition in the overall approach to air enabled combat power for the US and its allies.
The Complete Special Report “Shaping a 21st Century Approach to Tron Warfare” can be downloaded here:
2014-12-05 The first two aircraft landed onboard HMAS Canberra while alongside at Fleet Base East, Sydney in the build up to the ship’s commissioning.
The aircraft flew from HMAS Albatross, Nowra to begin deck handling trials on the Landing Helicopter Dock (LHD).
Although a significant step forward this is also just the start for HMAS Canberra’s Air Department with the focus now swiftly moving into Deck Handling Trials and First of Class Flight Trials (FOCFT).
The two embarked aircraft remained onboard Canberra and provided a focal point for the commissioning ceremony and will return to HMAS Albatross the following week.
Credit: Australian Ministry of Defence
12/5/14
According to a Jane’s story on the Canberra acceptance process:
The Australian government has accepted the first of its two Canberra-class landing helicopter docks (LHDs) from BAE Systems, the vessel’s prime contractor said in a statement on 8 October.
The ship will remain at BAE Systems’ Williamstown shipyard in Melbourne before its commissioning at Sydney later in 2014, the statement added.
It is due for delivery to the Royal Australian Navy (RAN) on 28 November.
Canberra , which is based on Navantia’s Juan Carlos I aircraft carrier design, completed its final contractor sea trials in late August.
Work is progressing on second ship Adelaide , which arrived in Australia for outfitting in February after being transported from Navantia’s Ferrol yard in Spain.
Adelaide is scheduled to begin sea trials in the second quarter of 2015, with delivery expected in 2016.
HMAS Canberra during sea trials. Credit: Australian Ministry of Defence
And the ship might become a future home for F-35Bs at sea as well.
In an input to the Defence White Paper process, David Baddams has had his paper on F-35Bs published on the Australian Ministry of Defence website.
The title captures the core argument about operating F-35Bs off of the Canberra-class LHDs: Proximity Means Capability.
This paper has explained some of the merits of embarked air power. It is stressed that it does not argue that embarked air power is a substitute for, or superior to, land-based air power in all circumstances.
Rather, it seeks to establish the fact that embarked air power has unique qualities that are ideally suited to the ADF and GoA.
It would also deliver air power that is more immediately usable. The UK’s experience may be considered. Since the end of WWII the RAF has not destroyed – or even engaged – an aircraft in air-to-air combat. Every air-to air kill has fallen to embarked fighters.
This is not because embarked aircraft or pilots were better. The simple fact is that in nearly all the UK’s post war operations, geography has meant that embarked strike-fighters were the first and closest to the battle.
The GoA, ADF and their advisers need to consider this fact.
And during Bold Alligator 2013, an interview with an Australian Army officer highlighted the impact of the ship on their operational thinking:
Second Line of Defense learned more about the Aussie transition with an opportunity to discuss the effort with an Aussie Army officer involved in Bold Alligator 2013. LtCol Bonavita is currently the Australian Army liaison officer with the USMC and is based at Quantico. He is finishing the final year of his three-year tour of duty in the United States. He participated last year in Bold Alligator 2012 with two other Aussie officers and in this year’s exercise with one other officer.
Throughout his interview, he emphasized that the Aussies have been preparing for the introduction of their new ships, in part by working with the USMC. LtCol Bonavita said “as far as we [Australia] are concerned, the Marines are the experts on amphibious operations.” Australia will look to share much information with the USMC as its Amphibious capability emerges. This is already occurring with a program of personnel exchanges and combined training.
LtCol Bonavita believes his posting to Quantico has been at the perfect time, because “as the Marines are returning to their amphibious roots, we are rediscovering ours with the introduction of our large amphibious vessels. Simultaneously, the Marines are establishing a presence in Darwin. These two issues have made for a busy assignment in the USA.”.
He also described how the working relationship with the USMC was an important part of the development of the Australian Army itself. “We have done a lot of work with the Marines, including our officers attending USMC courses like the Expeditionary Warfare School, through to participating in exercises like Tailsman Saber, RIMPAC and Expeditionary Warrior, and exchanges with 1st Marine Expeditionary Force (MEF) in San Diego.”
The relationships have been enduring. LTCOL Bonavita remarked that “When I was a platoon commander, a USMC company joined our battalion in Townsville as its MEU was deployed. In my current role I have found myself working with some of the very same officers from that Marine Company who are now USMC Colonels. It’s been very positive!”
tCol Bonavita suggested that continual work with the Marines would help shape the Australian thinking about the new ships and its approach to amphibious operations. “We have a USMC Colonel attached to the Australian Army’s Deployable Joint Force Headquarters within the 1st Division, which is one of the organizations leading our amphibious capability development.”
The Australian Army approach to amphibious operations and having a force structured to support them is incorporated in their transformation is called Plan BEERSHEBA.
The ability to deploy offshore is crucial and Plan BEERSHEBA will tie in with existing programs to improve the Australian Defence Force’s amphibious capability.
Plan BEERSHEBA introduces the Australia Defence Force’s new amphibious capabilities such as the new Landing Helicopter Docks (LHD) ships which represent a fundamental shift in how Army will deploy land forces and conduct operations in response to the full spectrum of conflict scenarios in the future.
The Army’s Deployable Joint Force Headquarters will foster and develop an amphibious culture across Army. To reinforce Army’s commitment, the Chief of Army has designated the 2nd Battalion, the Royal Australian Regiment (2 RAR) to form the core of Army’s contribution to a future amphibious force as this development work is done.During an interview with Army News, the Chief of Army explained that with new amphibious ships already in the pipeline, it’s time for Army to ‘make a very significant buy in.’
“What Beersheba is doing is giving the government and the ADF a wider range of options when they looks at the Army. Everything from humanitarian assistance through to warfighting, the Army can do it. The Army can get to that operational area with the right capabilities in the right timeframe and do something about the situation when they get there,” Lieutenant General Morrison said.
And according to John Blaxland, a senior fellow at the Strategic and Defence Studies Centre at the Australian National University:
Australia is in the process of acquiring two amphibious landing helicopter dock ships (LHDs) built by Spain’s Navantia and BAE Systems Australia following the design of the Spanish navy (Armada de Espana) LHD. The first semi-completed one arrived in Australia on October 17, 2012.
On this occasion it is worth reflecting on the parallels of the Spanish and Australian amphibious capabilities. Interestingly, Spain maintains an amphibious fleet of an LHD, two landing platform docking ships (LPDs) and a landing ship tank (LST), sister of former HMA ships Manoora and Kanimbla.
This is a configuration not unlike the one the Royal Australian Navy will have once the new LHDs come into operation. Spain lost its Latin American empire two centuries ago; so why does the Spanish navy need a four-ship amphibious capability?
As it turns out, the Spaniards place big emphasis on maintaining an amphibious warfighting capability, with an embarked force drawn from the world’s oldest marine corps, predating the US Marines by more than two centuries (it was created in 1537).
The force also includes its own integral onboard air power to operate against adversaries in contested situations. Spain recognises that developing and maintaining its amphibious capability is of the highest order of difficulty. Spain places high priority on ensuring the three armed services work together intimately to make the capability work properly in an opposed setting. But Spain also recognises that this capability enables it at short notice to provide humanitarian assistance and disaster relief…..
The utility of this approach has strong echoes in Australia’s region.
With its four-ship amphibious flotilla, Spain was able to act promptly and play a prominent role in disaster relief after the earthquake in Haiti in January 2010, much as they had done after a hurricane in Central America in 1998-99. When port facilities were destroyed and inoperable, Spain’s amphibious ships were able to operate off Haiti’s coast, providing a range of capabilities in support of the international relief efforts, reaching the shore with its amphibious craft and helicopters…..
Australia’s strategic circumstances, with the vast expanse of the Asia-Pacific region vulnerable to significant natural, environmental and other disasters, have pointed to the enduring utility of maintaining robust amphibious capabilities, not only for high-end war fighting, but for all the other assorted challenging tasks the armed forces are often called upon to assist with that might not necessarily be described as war-related. Indeed, experience in recent years has repeatedly demonstrated the utility of Australia maintaining afloat emergency response capabilities.
In December 1974 Australia’s last aircraft carrier, HMAS Melbourne, was sent to Darwin to assist with the recovery operations after cyclone Tracy.
The senior Marine in the Pacific, Lt. General Robling (recently retired) earlier this year commented on the Australian defense evolution with such capabilities in mind as follows
Our working relationship with Australia is a case in point.
Even though they see themselves… rightly… as an island continent, they’ve really got to be part of the entire region’s ability to respond to crisis, both natural and manmade. To do this, they can’t stay continent bound, and must engage forward in the greater Asia Pacific region.
By becoming part of a collective Pacific security apparatus, they get the added benefit of defending their nation away from their borders. The Australian military is small in comparison to the US, but it is a lethal and technologically sophisticated force.
n the face of a large-scale threat, they, like the US and others in the region, wouldn’t be able to defend by themselves. They would have to be a part of a larger collective security effort and ally with the US or other likeminded nations in the region in order to get more effective and less costly defense capabilities pushed farther forward.
This is one reason why their buying the JSF and the “Wedgetail” is so important. These two platforms are amazing force multipliers that bring to the region superior Command and Control and networked strike capabilities. These capabilities will be both additive and complementary to the capabilities other nations bring to collective security in the region.
The JSF with its superior networked sensor suite can collect a lot of information from sources at significant distances, and partner with the capabilities of the “Wedgetail” to help disseminate that information to air, sea, and land forces who need the information.
These capabilities and others make perfect sense for Australia and the greater Asia Pacific’s collective security requirements. In addition, other countries like Japan and Singapore can likewise contribute to this collective security because they too are buying the same types or similar military capabilities.
I like the term deterrence in depth because that’s exactly what it is. It’s not always about defense in depth.
It’s about deterring and influencing others behavior so they can contribute to the region’s stability, both economically and militarily, in an environment where everyone conforms to the rule of law and international norms.
It is often stated that Western powers will not operate alone in future air operations.
But to say this, and to do this effectively are two very different issues.
At the European Air Group at High Wycombe, seven key European Air Forces have set up an organization designed to enhance interoperability and collaborative operations in practical ways.
And it is no surprise that the EAG is thinking along similar lines with the coming of the F-35 to European Air Forces.
Even if a European Air Force is not flying an F-35, all will be affected by the redesign of air operations associated with the introduction of the F-35.
In a visit to the HQ of the European Air Group at High Wycombe in the United Kingdom, the Deputy Director of the EAG, Brigadier General Giacomo De Ponti, from the Italian Air Force, and the Chief of Staff, Col. Ron Hagemeijer from the RNLAF, discussed the role of the group and shaping a way ahead.
Question: What is the role of the European Air Group?
BG De Ponti: It is the only multinational entity entirely devoted to airpower issues. And it includes the Air Forces of Spain, France, Italy, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom.
It is set up to be efficient. We have a small permanent staff, which is hosted by the Royal Air Force at High Wycombe. The staff works directly for the seven Air Chiefs and works directly as well with the staffs of those Air Forces.
Outside the HQ of the EAG from left to right are Col. Hagemeijer, COS of the EAG, Robbin Laird, BG De Ponti, Deputy Director of the EAG. November 19, 2014.
The EAG is led by a steering group composed of the seven air chiefs; and the permanent staff is run by the Deputy Director and the Chief of Staff, who in this case are the two persons with whom you are discussing the EAG.
Each Air Force provides three staff members and then we have a small administrative support staff.
It is designed to small and agile yet plugged into the operations of the seven Air Forces.
The head of the EAG is a sitting Air Chief, in this case Air Chief Marshal Sir Andrew Pulford from the RAF. The Director, the Deputy Director and the COS serve normally for two years, and the staff provided by the Air Forces normally serves for three years.
Question: What is the focus of attention of the EAG?
BG De Ponti: The EAG tackles airpower issues, which need solutions to enhance interoperability among the member nations.
This can lead to tactical or strategic solutions.
And we have had important achievements to date such as the European Air Transport Command (EATC).
And the recent creation of the European Personnel Recovery Centre is an important step forward which the staff started the process, and went to the Chiefs and they approved going ahead, and then we worked more on the way ahead, and now we will see the Centre set up in Italy later this year.
And this Centre will combine military and civilian expertise and can well become a center of excellence for personnel recovery tasks, both military and civilian. And we are transferring our expertise in training in these areas to the new Centre which illustrates the way we work – we are not adding tasks for us to do and growing staff – we actually are transferring tasks when appropriate to a better placed mechanism.
Question: How does the EAG work?
BG De Ponti: The staff is small and designed to be agile and to operate up against a problem set. A frequent way we work is that the Chiefs meet once a year and provide taskings.
We then develop an initial picture of how the problem should be understood and then gain consensus on how to address the problem.
But the EAG is not simply the staff at High Wycombe.
Once the way ahead to deal with the problem is identified we work with the subject experts on the European Air Staffs to work through various solution sets.
We are focused on dealing with a 360 degree airpower domain, not just stovepipes so that we shape ways to work with the staffs in order to shape innovative synthetic solutions.
Indeed, we have restructured the staff away from having core domains of responsibility to working across domains to shape more innovative solutions.
In other words, we are not simply suggesting solutions we are engaged with those who will actually do the tasks so that an outcome will become operational.
And one must realize that although Europe is the location for this discussion we see a bigger stage and work with NATO, and the US as well.
Col. Hagemeijer: And a key effort in working through a subject is to determine who else is working the problem and to ensure that we are not simply duplicating efforts elsewhere.
We also can work both ways – from the Chiefs tasking us; to our own shaping of an important problem area which has been the case with regard to standing up of a European Personnel Recovery Centre.
To take the case of working the 4th-5th generation integration challenge, we are clearly focused on the multinational aspect of this challenge but we are very open to talking with other organizations in order not to duplicate work being done elsewhere, but we can also contribute to thinking through this challenge or opportunity on a multinational level.
Question: Working through ways to enhance interoperability and collaboration is also a way to ensure that money is being put on the way ahead and not simply investing in the past.
One does not need more horses, if tanks and aircraft are redefining warfare.
How do you see the aspect of thinking your way ahead and helping your countries invest wisely?
BG De Ponti: This is an important aspect of our potential contribution. In times of financial stringency, how do we get best value our of what we have, and as we have new capabilities how do we transform the legacy assets as well?
We will keep fourth generation aircraft operating for some time, but the F-35 is coming to European Air Forces.
How can the second enhance the capabilities of the first?
For an initial piece on the visit to the European Air Group see the following:
As a multinational organization thinking through the evolution of airpower, a key challenge and opportunity is to shape interoperability and convergent concepts of operations among a fleet of different types of aircraft.
In the slideshow above, some of these aircraft are highlighted.
In the first photo, Royal Netherlands Air Force Lt. Col. Marten “Jimi” Hendriksma, of Bergen op Zoom, the Netherlands, commander, Air Task Force-17, based out of Volkel of Airbase, the Netherlands, taxis down the flight line in an F-16 Fighting Falcon fighter jet before conducting a mission from Kandahar Airfield, Afghanistan. The Dutch air force conduced reconnaissance missions and provides close-air support to assist International Security Assistance Force elements throughout Afghanistan. 7/11/11
In the second photo, two German Air Force Eurofighter Typhoons wait to launch from the runway June 4, 2012, Eielson Air Force Base, Alaska. This was the first time the Typhoons have participated in RED FLAG-Alaska 12-2. The GAF arrived early to become familiarized with the airspace and prepare for RF-A. 6/4/12
In the third photo, a Russian Bear ‘H’ aircraft was photographed from an intercepting RAF Typhoon with another Typhoon tailing it on 29 October. The number of Eurofighter intercepts has gone up by a factor of three over the past few months. Credit: The Independent. A Spanish Typhoon is seen in flight in the fourth photo. Credit. Spanish MOD
A French A400m is seen at its Orleans base in the fifth photo. Credit: Murielle Delaporte.
A French Air Force C-135FR is seen refueling a RAAF A330 MRTT (KC-30A) in the sixth photo. Credit: Airbus Defence and Space.
In the seventh photo, an Italian tanker is seen in a refueling operation. Credit: Italian Air Force.
In the eighth photo, two C-130 Hercules from the Belgium air force’s 20 Squadron taxi on the flightline Feb. 2 after completing a mission in Red Flag 11-2. The C-130s deployed from Melsbroek Air Base, Belgium, to participate in the combined exercise that provides a realistic combat training environment to the U.S. and its allies. 2/2/11
In the ninth photo, a French Rafale fighter is seen in flight. Credit: FAF.
The 10th and 11th photos show UK F-35s in operation. Credit: Lockheed Martin.
And the 12th and 13th show the first two Dutch F-35s. Credit: Lockheed Martin.
And the final photo shows an Italian Air Force Tornado taking off from Uvda Air Force Base, Israel, during the Blue Flag exercise Nov. 26, 2013. 11/26/13
Economics, politics and global threats are reinforcing a shift away from the globalism of the past thirty years and posing the possibility of a new phase of global development, in which nationalism returns as a clearer definer of the way ahead for the global system.
It has been more than six years since the Lehman collapse in September, 2008, and the start of the Great Financial Crisis.
That crisis had debilitating effects on both advanced and emerging market economies. For almost six decades prior to the Lehman shock the world had experienced growth in world trade at a pace roughly twice as fast as domestic growth. This enabled many economies to escape slow domestic consumption and weak government spending by turning to exports as an engine of faster growth.
The Lehman shock not only set in motion systemic challenges to the world’s banking system and financial markets. It also brought about a collapse in world trade into the longest, deepest contraction since the 1930s.
By 2010 world trade recovered to a level comparable to where it had been in August 2008.
However, this pickup was not sustained.
Instead, trade again relapsed and settled in at a far slower pace than had prevailed during the previous six decades. At close to the end of this year, it would appear world trade growth has slowed further, hovering near stagnation.
Not surprisingly, the many national economies around the world that had become dependent for growth on exports into swelling world markets found their economies had lost traction.
GDP growth slipped back to the pace of growth in domestic demand, which had been suppressed, by both inadequate consumption and investment, and negative consequences of continuing global financial market stress.
Some popular analysts pronounced the world had entered a “new normal” path of sub-2% growth, with threatening risks of slipping back into recession and renewal of systemic crises among financial institutions.
Economic growth this year did not demonstrate the recovery forecasted by public and private forecasters. Instead, what materialized in 2014 was a mix of continued minimal growth or stagnation in luckier nations and recession in others.
Global stock markets prospered this year, levitated by various extraordinary monetary measures by central banks, but the gains in wealth from trading paper assets failed to lift the economic conditions of most people. Economic policy debate increasingly turned attention to what appeared to be a long term trend of growing income inequality throughout the world.
In 2014 more and more national governments and their central banks felt growing pressure to devise measures to ease the pains of high unemployment, declining wages, rising health care costs, weakened retirement systems, and growing debt of both governments and individual families.
As it became evident that international common efforts to revive global growth had failed, and as national economic policy priorities rose, consideration of the effects of domestic policies on other economies around the world faded into the background.
Following the Lehman crisis central banks intensified cooperation with one another to stabilize world financial markets. The US Federal Reserve agreed to initiate or enlarge swap lines with a variety of other central banks among advanced and emerging market economies. The Fed also guided US federal government assistance to banks in a manner that would enable troubled European megabanks to gain substantial benefits from US Government aid to large banks and nonbank financial institutions.
The G20 Summit of 2008 was called to formalize cooperation among central banks, finance ministries, and financial regulators. Summit leaders announced creation of a new multilateral Financial Stability Board (FSB), which would undertake continuous deliberations among financial market officials of all countries.
This new consultative framework did succeed in helping most national authorities to develop common ideas on financial regulatory reforms aimed at averting new systemic financial crises.
In particular it advanced collective international discussion of new, heightened capital requirements for banks, identification of systemically important financial institutions (SIFIs), new attention to liquidity risks in addition to solvency risks, and need for international oversight of derivatives contracts of hundreds of trillions of dollars in scale.
However, by the time the G20 met in Brisbane mid-November this year, the failure of economic recovery to appear had changed international interaction. The scene became set for a return to economic nationalism. This was particularly evident at the Brisbane Summit, where leaders agreed action was needed to lift global economic growth, but could not agree on specific steps or new forms of international cooperation and policy coordination among them.
Expecting currency and monetary policy clashes, they could not even agree to establish multilateral mechanisms to manage differences in national trade, currency and monetary policies. They were only able to announce a purely rhetorical $2 trillion stimulus to global economic growth – an empty pledge without serious national action commitments.
Even the cohesion of the EU and the Eurozone is now being dramatically weakened as individual European governments find themselves unable to agree with each other on how to implement meaningful, synchronized fiscal and monetary actions.
They could not even agree or how to proceed with common financial market reforms such as the proposed EU Banking Union.
What started out a year ago as European teamwork to identify strengths and weaknesses of European financial institutions fell apart in efforts to defend past regulatory practices and national political objectives.
New EU/ECB bank stress tests were announced as a serious effort to gain full transparency of strengths and weaknesses of European financial institutions.
As the stress tests evolved towards the October target date for imposing common criteria for measuring the health of European banks, national priorities overwhelmed the need for common measurements of risk and valuations of bank capital. Instead, myriad parallel measures of bank health were permitted throughout Europe, with every government and every bank permitted to seek means of minimalizing exposure to non-performing assets and maximize estimations of quality capital.
The October EU and ECB stress tests once again hid the most serious vulnerabilities to systemic risk in hopes that optimistic test results would be sufficient to induce private investors to invest in banks once again and encourage banks to resume lending.
EU and ECB authorities made significant efforts to devise and impose common regulatory reforms, particularly requirements for increased bank capital relative to assets, and increased “liquidity buffers” for the biggest banks. However, ongoing disputes developed with US regulators about such questions as imposition of common platforms for trading derivatives, and common capital requirements for US and foreign banks operating in the US.
Late this year European authorities cited these disputes as an excuse for postponing for several more years tougher capital-asset ratios and liquidity buffers on European banks.
One might summarize the European financial market reform process as an intellectual exercise in devising regulatory reforms while simultaneously seeking reasons for delaying such reforms as long as possible.
Domestic political dissatisfaction with austerity fiscal policies, no growth in wages, youth unemployment extremes, out of control immigration, health care and retirement uncertainties, growing public and private debt, and a host of other national and local political issues now preoccupy politics of most national governments.
With widening public disappointment in economic conditions, domestic regional and local political dissent is now rising in many European nations.
The US Federal Reserve modified its traditional domestic bias when world markets and world financial institutions stumbled or came to near collapse during the Great Financial Crisis of recent years. To help stabilize global financial stability, the Fed arranged substantial increases in its swap lines with other central banks to help prevent a global liquidity collapse.
In some cases the swap lines became instruments of specific bank rescue, as when the Fed increased its swap line with the Swiss National Bank (SNB) in order to enable the SNB to bail out UBS bank.
The Fed also facilitated availability of US bank rescue funds like TARP to non-US banks, especially European banks. Now, however, internal Fed discussions are far more focused on the continuing slow growth in the US economy, with far less deference to concerns of Asia and Europe.
The failure of the world economy to bounce back turned attention of central banks inward to execution of national measures to levitate their own national markets.
National governments seemed politically unable to develop coherent fiscal and structural policies to revitalize their respective economies. In the absence of fiscal and structural reforms, central banks sought monetary measures that might avert or at least postpone steep economic downturn or collapse of key financial institutions.
Gradually the attention of central banks moved beyond the objective of ensuring financial market stability to stimulus of economic growth in the absence of needed fiscal and regulatory actions.The US Federal Reserve and the Bank of England initiated and gradually expanded QE measures, ostensibly to prop up their banking systems. Now the US and UK extraordinary liquidity injections have come to an end, and both the BOE and Fed are refocused on domestic priorities, especially unwinding the influence of central banks on financial market behavior.
In short, the return to a more economic nationalistic stance reinforces a number of global security trends where nationalism is spurring conflict.
Economics, politics and threats are working together to shape the decade ahead for this part of the 21st century.
The post-WWII international institutions that were crafted to reduce conflicts between nations and deter forceful resolution of disputes all seem to be losing influence. In their place currency wars, resource conflicts, regulatory clashes, and assertions of sovereignty in areas of long unresolved disputes are likely to emerge.
Once again nations will meet in hopes of averting more serious physical conflicts, as they did from the time of Bretton Woods through the rest of the 20th Century.
However, in the present context of global economic stagnation and faltering national responses it will be far harder for individual governments to agree to collective action.
Working in concert now would likely entail yielding some degree of national sovereignty, including sovereignty of parliaments and the historic autonomy of the US Congress. to transnational decision bodies.
A rise of nationalism at a time when most governments are increasingly paralyzed politically by unhappy citizenries will encourage regional and global use of military force to exploit vulnerabilities of some nations relative to others.
Uncontained, rising nationalism could easily degenerate into another era of local, regional, and eventually global military confrontations.
