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.
In October 2006 and more so since early 2007, more than three years into the insurgency in Iraq the US decided to approach the Sunni tribes in a systematic way for cooperation against al-Qa`ida. By late 2008 with the Surge and through cooperation with the Sunni tribal Awakening militia under Shaykh Abd al-Sattar Abu Risha the insurgency was essentially over.
Between 2009 and 2011 though the American forces in Iraq gradually ceased their cooperation with the tribes and their shaykhs. The Sunni tribes that had risked their lives in the fight against al-Qa`ida were abandoned.
The Shi`I sectarian government of Nuri al-Maliki, whom the US preferred over the secular, all-Iraqi American-friendly Iyad Allawi began a campaign of marginalization, humiliation and discrimination against the Sunnis, especially in the tribal areas.
The US remained essentially inert.
The Kurds, too, were left to Maliki’s sectarian rule. This led to near-total breakdown of Kurdish-Baghdad relations.
There is no other way to keep the country together and give people a sense of security is to make each community responsible for security in its territory through a local National Guard unit. The only chance of booting ISIS out and keeping Iraq in one piece is if Iraq becomes a loose federation. Credit Image: Bigstock
But the Kurds at least had an effective autonomy. The result in the Sunni areas was the resurrection of al-Qa`ida, eventually under the title the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
Last June, with mostly passive support of the same Sunni tribes that had fought al-Qa`ida, they conquered Mosul and most of the Sunni areas of Iraq. Then they changed their name once more to “the Islamic State” (IS), or the Caliphate.
The rest is history.
Though it comes late, the present US policy of re-engaging is making sense, but it harbors dangers beyond mere lack of military success. There are already the first signs of an approaching problem: if not immediately re-designing its military policy the US is at a growing risk of enabling ethnic cleansing and appearing as anti-Sunni and pro-Iranian.
The US air-to-ground support for the lifting of the siege that the IS terrorists imposed on the Shi`i-Turkmen town of Amerli in northern Iraq in early September 2014 was in itself a necessary humanitarian decision.
However, because there are many Sunni villages in this territory, by allowing the unruly Shi`i militias to take part in this operation the US planners became implicated in an anti-Sunni ethnic cleansing, in addition to kidnappings and murders initiated by the Shi`i militias. As different from support for the Iraqi Kurds, which justified itself completely, support for Shi`i-controlled Baghdad did not.
Most of the areas that need to be taken back from ISIS are Sunni-Arab areas. In those areas only the Iraqi army and Sunni militias should be allowed to operate on the ground. Luckily there still exist the remnants of the Sunni Awakening militia in al-Anbar under Shaykh Ahmad Abu Risha (his brother Sattar was assassinated in 2007), and on the condition of a change in Baghdad’s policy he is ready to support the Iraqi regime.
In addition, a few more Sunni tribes are inclined to cooperate with Baghdad and the US, provided that they receive guarantees that Baghdad will not renege on its promise of respecting Sunni rights. Parts of tribes like albu-Fahd and albu-Nimr in Anbar and of the Jubbur and Shammar Jarba in Salah al-Din and Ninnewe indicated their readiness to fight ISIS.
But by October 2014 Baghdad is not yet ready for the necessary concession.
In a country that descended to the deepest abyss of sectarian hate and fear there is no other way to keep the country together and give people a sense of security is to make each community responsible for security in its territory through a local National Guard unit.
The Guard, however will have to be financed – like the state army – by Baghdad.
The regular Iraqi state army, while mainly Shi`i, is trusted by Sunnis and Kurds, but not fully so. Ergo, its presence in the Sunni and Kurdish areas must depend on the consent or invitation of the governor of each province.
What about Max Weber’s “state monopoly on violence” (Gewaltmonopol des Staates)? This was what the Americans saw in 2003 as the Iraq of the future. It fitted well into the molds of post-WWII Germany and Japan.
However, Weber’s theory is mere theory based on a generalized Western observation. Iraq’s religious and ethnic divides and the existence of tribal affinities in 2003 made it very different both from Germany and Japan and this is even more the case today.
Admittedly, local National Guard units may result with the complete disintegration of Iraq. This is a bad option. But there are paths between the extremes of high centralization and disintegration.
Many states have found ways to organize local forces as a complement to the centralized military power. Perhaps the most successful example was the formation of the U.S. National Guard. Like Iraq’s militias, the National Guard originated as local communities organized for self-protection and self-preservation.
Eventually, going through a few stages, the National Guard became a component of the federal government’s reserves.[ref] See Jerry Cooper, The Rise of the National Guard: the evolution of the American militia, 1865-1920, University of Nebraska Press, 2002.[/ref]
Iraq is not the US, but the same principle, if applied according to the local conditions, is promising. In fact, this is one of the demands that unite all Sunni factions.
The Kurds already have their National Guard, the Peshmergas, but Baghdad is rejecting their demand that the central government would pay the cost.
Rising to a higher vantage point, not just National Guard units should be encouraged and supported: the only chance of booting ISIS out and keeping Iraq in one piece is if Iraq becomes a loose federation.
Baghdad’s immense oil revenues (around $100bn annually that may be doubled within a decade) coming mostly from the Shi`i south represent a powerful aphrodisiac that may prevent Sunni and Kurdish secession, while wide powers for the provinces will prevent sectarian and ethnic domineering, fear and alienation.
Until a Shi`i-Sunni-Kurdish agreement along these or similar lines is hammered in, American military support for Baghdad must be extremely limited. Any support for Baghdad’s Shi`i-dominated regime beyond the bare minimum of preventing ISIS from conquering Baghdad neighborhoods will create the impression that the US is fighting the Sunnis and serving the interests of Iran.
Finally, Sunni tribal and National Guard units are essential in order to push ISIS out of the Sunni areas not only to prevent ethnic cleansing: they are essential also because there will be no American boots on the ground this time.
The Shi`i-majority national army is no match to ISIS, and the Shi`i militias must not be allowed in and the Kurds will fight only in their own territory.
Unless Turkey agrees to send its military into Iraq (and Syria), something that looks rather doubtful, only Sunni tribes can provide the necessary boots to kick ISIS out.
Prof. Dr. Amatzia Baram is a professor of Middle East History and Director of the Center for Iraq Studies at the University of Haifa.
Professor Baram was born in Kibbutz Kfar Menachem in southern Israel and raised and educated there.
He served as an officer and commanded tank units in the Armoured Corps during his regular military service from 1956 to 1960 and while in the reserves.
He was ‘on loan’ to the Iraqi desk at Military Intelligence as an analyst when the Iraq-Iran War began in 1980.
After release from regular military service he worked on the kibbutz farm, before graduating in biology and teaching sciences at the kibbutz high school.
He he decided on a career change following the Six Day War in 1967 and started his education as an historian of the modern Middle East and Islam in 1971
The USMC is the only tiltrotar-enabled assault force in the world.
The USS America has been built to facilitate this capability and will be augmented as the F-35B is added to the Ospreys, and helicopters already operating from the ship and as unmanned vehicles become a regular operational element as well.
To set the proper landscape to discuss the changes within aviation and the amphibious fleet, one can go back a decade ago and look at the aviation and ship pairings and their operational reach.
The ARG-MEU a decade ahead operated within the LPD-17, without the T-AKE ship, without the Osprey and was primarily a rotorcraft, landing vehicle and mixture of Harrier fast jets force. And the three ship ARG-MEU would operate largely in a 200-mile box affecting the objective area where it was located.
The Osprey has obviously been a game changer, where today, the ARG-MEU can “disaggregate” and operate over a three-ship distributed 1,000-mile operational area. Having the communications and ISR to operate over a greater area, and to have sustainment for a disaggregated fleet is a major challenge facing the future of the USN-USMC team.
A major change in the ship can be seen below the flight deck, and these changes are what allow the assault force enabled by new USMC aviation capabilities to operate at greater range and ops tempo.
The ship has three synergistic decks, which work together to support flight deck operations. Unlike a traditional large deck amphibious ship where maintenance has to be done topside, maintenance is done in a hangar deck below the flight deck.
And below that deck is the intermediate area, where large workspaces exist to support operations with weapons, logistics and sustainment activities.
This graphic focuses upon the USS America deck synergy and the workflow thereby facilitated. Credit: Second Line of Defense
In an interview with the ship’s Captain, Robert Hall, just prior to the departure in mid-July from the Ingalls Huntington shipyard in Pascagoula Mississippi, the CO highlighted some of the ship’s capabilities:
The ship has several capabilities, which allow us to stay on station longer than a traditional LHA and to much better support the Ospreys and the F-35Bs which will be the hallmark of USMC aviation to enable long range amphibious assault. These aircraft are larger than their predecessors.
They need more space for maintenance and this ship provides it.
We have two high-hat areas to support the maintenance, one of them located behind the aft flight deck elevator to allow movement through the hangar.
We have significantly greater capacity to store spare parts, ordnance and fuel as well. We can carry more than twice as much JP-5 than a traditional LHA.
The ship has three synergistic decks, which allow for a significant enhancement of the logistical or sustainment punch of the amphibious strike force.
According to Captain Hall:
I like the synergistic description.
The flight deck is about the size of a legacy LHA. But that is where the comparison ends. By removing the well deck, we have a hangar deck with significant capacity to both repair aircraft and to move them to the flight deck to enhance ops tempo.
With the Ospreys, we will be able to get the Marines into an objective area rapidly and at significant distances. And when the F-35B comes the support to the amphibious strike force is significantly enhanced.
And we will be able to operate at much greater range from the objective area.
With the concern about littoral defenses, this ship allows us the option to operate off shore to affect events in the littoral.
This is a major advantage for a 21st century USN-USMC team in meeting the challenges of 21st century littoral operations.
The USS America will provide a significant boost to the ability to both maintain and to provide operational tempo to support the force.
And in an additional interview with Major David Schreiner, the ship integration officer within Headquarters USMC Aviation, the Marine Corps officer highlighted how the ship will do this and how it fits into evolving thinking about the future of the amphibious task force.
According to Major Schreiner, one of the key elements of maintaining the Osprey is the need to open the nacelles and to work on them. On current LHAs, this can only be done topside, but with the new ship, it will be possible to maintain the Ospreys completely in the Hangar deck.
The traditional LHA was sized primarily for rotorcraft operations; the new one is sized for the Osprey and the F-35B.
According to Major Schreiner:
The footprint of the new aviation assets are about 30-40% larger than the rotorcraft and fast jets they are replacing. With the change in operational capabilities and concepts comes the need to provide for a new logistics capability for the force as well.
The logistics demands from the Ospreys on the traditional LHAs required work topside, which affects flight deck operations as well as facing daylight limitations within which the work needed to be done.
What we found with the MV-22 was that it needed some extra space. It needed some space in the hangar for assault maintenance. What we found in the legacy amphibious ships that we were unable to do that efficiently down below, so the workaround for the Marines, the only workaround is to do those modifications topside which are extremely time consuming and it is a delicate balance on doing them during a period of daylight where they could effectively see and then balance it out with flight operations.
To get the needed changes, the ship designers of the USS America look to the hangar deck and the intermediate areas. The hangar deck has no well deck and that provides extra space as well as overhead cranes and storage areas for parts.
The ops tempo for the assault force is enhanced as well.
According to Major Schreiner:
“The idea was is not only to provide enough space to incorporate for the growth in airframes and the logistics footprints but also to provide for operational maneuver space down below as well. We can cycle planes from the hangar to the flight deck to enhance sortie generation rates for the helos, the Ospeys and the F-35Bs in whatever package is appropriate to the mission.”
Working the synergy among the three decks will be crucial to shaping the workflow to support operational tempo.
“Your next aircraft for the flight deck can be positioned down below for a quick elevator run thereby enabling a larger volume of flights off the deck. You could then work into the deck cycle and elevator run to bring up those extra aircraft as a way not only to provide backups but to provide extra sorties for the flight deck.”
Synergy and enhanced workflow are really the two outcomes which come from a ship designed for 21st century assault assets.
Instead of having to do all the maintenance topside you have the spaces down below from the heavy maintenance with the use of upright cranes and the work centers that are collocated right on the hangar bay with the supporting equipment work centers, the control work centers, and just below it on the intermediate deck below.
You have all your supply centers and then you have your intermediate level maintenance as well for that sensitive calibration, for the more complex repairs.
This creates a cycle or synergy where you have supervisors that the work centers are collocated with the maintenance that’s being done on the hangar. You have maintenance actions being produced. They are brought in; they are logged into the system, they are evaluated, they can go downstairs and they can either be fixed on the spot, calibrated, the part could be reworked or the supply system being right there, a new part in the supply could be issued back up, turned. There will be very little waste of time between different parts of the ship all supervised, brought back up, and repaired on the plane.
Clearly, this workflow will be a work in progress as the crew and the Marines shape ways to work the decks to optimize what can come off of the flight deck.
Aircraft maintenance and operations at sea are extremely hard; extremely hard on the actual airframes and they are extremely hard on the maintainers that are doing the work because the reality of it is that in a 24 hour cycle, half the time is spent conducting flight operations topside where there is very little space to do maintenance.
It is just too congested.
It is too busy and so by default you have to wait till flight operations stop which limits you in your maintenance to periods usually in darkness where it is hard or reduce cycle say 12 hours to do the maintenance in order to turn those aircraft around.
By having access to hangar bay, you have a safe space, you have a well-lighted space; you have room to safely move and now you are able to do concurrent maintenance actions.
I’m not saying that you couldn’t do that on a legacy class but you can just do this on a much greater scale and with greater efficiency on the AMERICA so you are able to make the timely inputs, the timely maintenance actions ultimately to keep the available assets up.
For operators and maintainers, the intermediate area below the hangar deck is a major change as well.
Marines will have access to world class or corner space standard test batches for calibration, they can do everything at sea can be done in a corner space or a land environment. From a warship capability is amazing and the goal is to increase the repairable capability on the ship rather than waiting for parts to be sent to the ship.
Transit time loss is a big deal; sometimes we have to go halfway around the world for a part because there is no way to beat the geographic distance.
The only way you can do that with a part is to have a spare in the supply system.
Now you have an aircraft that either has to have a cannibalization of a part to keep it flying or you have to wait and you have your downtime on an aircraft.
The goal of the I level is to be able to actually be able to repair aircraft with parts on board. And with the increased storage capacity this clearly will happen.
The USS America will make a significant contribution to the amphibious strike force, but no platform fights alone.
It will be a key element or even flag ship of evolving approaches. When one marries the new MSC assets –T-AKE and USNS Montford Point assets – to the LPD-17 and the USS America, the USN-USMC team will have a very flexible assault force, with significant vehicle space, berthing space for embarked Marines and shaping the future mix and match capabilities of the modular force.
This slide highlights the dynamics of change involved with the seabase. The seabase is a disruptive change element when evolving USMC aviation in included in the mix. Credit Slide: USMC
To illustrate the impact of such a task force on berthing of embarked Marines, in addition to berthing on the USS America, one could carry 680 Marines aboard an LPD-17, 100 aboard a T-AKE ship and 250 aboard a Montford Point, and that is with current capabilities which be modified as modular capabilities evolve against operational needs, requirements and funding.
In short, the USS America is part of the evolving amphibious strike task force, and will work synergistically with other new or legacy assets in providing capabilities necessary for 21st century operations.
Editor’s Note: Shortly after the interviews with Captain Hall, and Major Schreiner , the USS travelled through the U.S. Southern Command and U.S. 4th Fleet area of responsibility on her maiden transit, “America visits the Americas,” and made various port visits along the way including Brazil, Chile, Uruguay and Peru.
During the transit, the USS America officers and crew remembered the 2001 attack on the US. As Captain Hall noted: “Our Chief Petty Officer Selects put on the remembrance and did a fantastic job. It was a very moving ceremony at sea!
The ship is scheduled to be ceremoniously commissioned Oct. 11 in San Francisco, California.
In the slideshow earlier in the article, two tiltrotor MV-22 Osprey, assigned to the “Argonauts” of Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron (VMX) 22, transport distinguished visitors from Trinidad and Tobago to the future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6).
Credit: USS America:September 2014
In photo 2, Aviation Electronics Technician 3rd Class Trevor Vindelov, assigned to the “Blackjacks” of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 21, performs a corrosion inspection on a MH-60S Seahawk helicopter in the hangar bay of future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6).
In photos 3-5, a Brazilian S-70B Seahawk helicopter departs the flight deck of future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) during deck landing qualifications (DLQs) as part of a training partnership between the Brazilian and U.S. navies.
In photo 6, a Brazilian EC-725 Cougar helicopter prepares to land on the flight deck of future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) during deck landing qualifications (DLQs) as part of a training partnership between the Brazilian and U.S. navies.
In photo 7, Marines assigned to Combat Cargo Department aboard future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) prepare cargo on the flight deck for transport, during a vertical replenishment (VERTREP) qualifying evolution.
In photo 8, Marines assigned to Combat Cargo Department aboard future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) clear the area after attaching cargo to an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter, assigned to the “Blackjacks” of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 21, during a vertical replenishment (VERTREP) qualification evolution.
In photo 9, Marines assigned to Combat Cargo Department aboard future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6) attach cargo to an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter, assigned to the “Blackjacks” of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 21, during a vertical replenishment (VERTREP) qualification evolution.
In photo 10, an aviation boatswain’s mate (handling) directs an MH-60S Seahawk helicopter, assigned to the “Blackjacks” of Helicopter Sea Combat Squadron (HSC) 21, to maintain its elevation as Marines assigned to Combat Cargo Department clear the area after attaching cargo during a vertical replenishment (VERTREP) qualification evolution aboard future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6).
In photo 11, Interior Communications Electrician 2nd Class Allen Trent, assigned to future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6), uses a multimeter to test continuity on a pier-to-ship telephone connection box in the IC repair shop.
In photo 12, Chief Personnel Specialist Daniel Peters reads testing instructions to participants of the Navywide advancement examination for petty officer second class, on the mess decks of future amphibious assault ship USS America (LHA 6).
For an overview on the USS America and its capabilities which was published earlier in Front Line Defence see the following:
The current article is republished with permission of Opérationannels, Soutien Logistique Défense Sécurité and will be published in the Number 22 Autumn 2014 and available at the Euronaval, the largest naval show in Europe.
From August 24-29, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) held “Peace Mission 2014” at China’s Zhurihe Training Base, in Inner Mongolia in North China.
This is China’s base for engaging in large-scale exercises with foreign armies on its soil.
Peace Mission 2014 was the largest military exercise conducted by the SCO, with five of the six member countries participating (China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan but not Uzbekistan).
The drills saw tanks, warplanes, and precision missions being used against a terrorist group that had thousands of fighters as well as its own light aircraft and ground equipment. The SCO forces used drones, airborne early warning aircraft, air-defense missiles, tanks, armored vehicles, ground and air forces, and special operations units.
Chinese troops prepare for one of the biggest joint military exercises. (Photo: AFP)
A total of about 70 aircraft were dispatched for the drill, including fighter planes, early warning aircraft, and armed helicopters and drones.
In justifying the exercises, Chinese writers pointed to the growing threat that terrorism in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries would spill-over into Central Asia and argued that “joint military drills and other moves taken by SCO members for defense and security cooperation will send a strong deterrent signal to the ‘three forces’ of terrorism, extremism and separatism in the region.”
Fang Fenghui, Chief of the General Staff of the People’s Liberation Army, said that, “The success of the joint drill demonstrated…their resolution to fight against the three evil forces of terrorism, separatism, and extremism.”
The combined forces also displayed new skills.
The drill consisted of ground and aerial reconnaissance, joint precision strikes, integrated air-ground assaults on fortified position, joint hostage rescue and urban assault missions, and extensive information-sharing.
According to Liu Zhenli, Commander of China’s 38th Army, “The level of collaboration this time is much higher than in previous joint military exercises. We have established a joint commanding center, and another affiliated commanding center for five armies and air forces. An information sharing mechanism has also be set up among five parties for reconnaissance. Joint actions have also been carried out, especially in terms of hostage rescue.”
The exercise scenario involved an international terrorist organization supporting a separatist movement in a country and, engaging in terrorist attacks, and plotting coups and regime change.
More specifically, the scenario hypothesized that a city in an unnamed Eurasian country (implicitly a SCO member) becomes a hub of political instability and terrorist activity, and its government calls on the SCO to intervene to resolve the issues.
Photo taken on Aug. 26 shows China’s drone shooting off a missile during the drill. China’s military drones participated in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) anti-terror drills in Inner Mongolia for the first time on Aug. 26, 2014. (Photo source: news.cn)
The fictitious separatist organization has more than 2,000 fighters armed with tanks, missiles and even light aircraft.
The exercise’s three phases included troop deployments, battle planning, and simulated combat.
Before the live drills, the multinational forces moved to the Zhurihe base, conducted some planning meetings, and held an opening ceremony in which the deputy chiefs of the general staff from China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan and deputy commander of Russia’s eastern military command participated. The first stage of the exercise involved the SCO forces using electronic warfare measures against the adversary’s communication systems.
Then Russian and Chinese planes, helicopters, and drones carried out air strikes against the “terrorists.” The SCO forces then employed high-precision artillery attacks that destroyed the terrorists’ command centers.
Finally, SCO ground forces with combined air support liberated the terrorist-occupied zones and freed their hostages.
China provided the most troops by far, around 5,000 personnel and 440 combat systems from the 38th Combined Corps and the air force under the PLA’s Beijing Military Area Command (MAC) as well as forces directly under the PLA general headquarters/departments, including aerospace reconnaissance, mapping, hydro-meteorological and mobile logistics support detachments providing “strategic and operational support.”
The People’s Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF) CH-4 unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) made its first appearance at a SCO drill.
The CH-4 (Cai Hong 4 or Rainbow 4), which resembles the General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper, shot several targets during the live fire drills.
One PLA official said that the drones’ ability to monitor, identify and destroy ground targets in real time made it an important tool in fighting terrorists. PRC authorities claim that Uighur insurgents fighting Beijing’s rule in the vast northwestern region of Xinjiang have used illicit border crossings and desert encampments that could be monitored by air. Chinese aerospace firms have developed dozens of drones and the PLA is eager to take advantage of these unmanned systems.
The Chinese also contributed some of their most sophisticated manned aircraft such as the J-10 and J-11 fighter jets, its JH-7 fighter bombers, and its KJ-2000 airborne early warning and control aircraft.
Also debuting in the SCO exercises were the WZ-10 and WZ-19 attack helicopters used by the PLAAF and the Ground Force Air Force.
Russian soldiers arrive at the train station of the Zhurihe training base, north China’s Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, Aug. 16, 2014. A total of some 2,200 troops on Monday arrived at at the Zhurihe training base, where “Peace Mission-2014,” a drill under the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) framework, ran from Aug. 24-29. Credit Text and Photo: Xinhua
The larger Z-10 “Fierce Thunderbolt” is designed primarily for anti-tank missions but has some air-to-air capability; the smaller Z-19 “Black Whirlwind” is an upgraded version of the Z-9 attack helicopter, which is also manufactured by the Harbin Aircraft Industry Group. During the drills, the helicopters practiced reconnaissance and rocket barrages.
In addition, three IL-76 transport aircraft from an aviation regiment of the Guangzhou MAC air dropped people and equipment during the drills. The PLA Army’s most modern Main Battle Tank, the Type 99, a variant of the former Soviet T-72, also took part in the exercises.
Almost 1,000 Russian troops participated in Peace Mission 2014, travelling by rail from Russia’s Eastern Military District.
The main units were the 36th Separate Motorized Infantry Brigade and an aviation group from the 3rd Air Force and Air Defense Command. Russia also contributed 60 armored vehicles, including 40 BMP-2 infantry combat vehicles capable of operating under water, 13 T-72 main battle tanks, more than 20 missile and artillery systems (including the SAU 2S3M self-propelled guns and BM-21 multiple-launch rocket systems), more than 60 other military vehicles, eight Mi-8 AMTSh helicopter gunships, four Sukhoi Su-25 attack planes, and two IL-76 military transport planes.
The Russian media reported that the artillery systems used Krasnopol semi-automatic laser-guided explosive projectiles during their drills.
Unlike in Peace Mission 2013, the Central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan each sent hundreds of elite soldiers.
Kyrgyzstan deployed about 500 members of its special forces units along with a few dozen combat vehicles including eight tanks. On this occasion, Kazakhstan, which often sends the largest Central Asian contingent, provided only about 300 elite airborne troops.
Furthermore, some 200 rapid reaction troops came from Tajikistan. Although Uzbekistan is an SCO member, the country normally does not send troops to participate in its exercises. The observers included representatives from the SCO Secretariat, the SCO regional anti-terrorism organizations, the five SCO observer states, the three dialogue partners and military attaches from more than 60 countries.
The day before the exercise ended, Chinese President Xi Jinping met with the SCO chiefs of staff, then meeting in Beijing, and praised the exercises for “having made positive contributions to regional security and stability.”
In addition to China’s large troop contribution, Wang Ning, chief director of the Joint Directing Department of the exercise and deputy chief of general staff of the PLA, boasted at the start of the drills that the SCO “exercise will be conducted in China throughout the process for the first time” and occur simultaneously with a meeting of the PLA chiefs of general staff and a military music festival.
The Russia-China defense partnership looks likely to continue for at least the next few years.
The new Chinese leadership seems eager to cultivate defense ties with Russia. During Xi’s March 2013 Moscow visit, when he became the first Chinese president to visit the Russian Armed Forces Operational Command Center, Xi said that, “My visit to the Russian Defense Ministry is intended to confirm that military, political and strategic relations between the two countries will strengthen as will cooperation between the Armed Forces of China and Russia.”
At the time, PRC Defense Minister General Chang Wanquan told his Russian counterpart, General Sergei Shoigu, that “China is ready to work with Russia to tap that potential and expand the scope of bilateral defense co-operation, so as to lift it to a new level.”
At the beginning of Peace Mission 2014, General Valery Gerasimov, chief of the general staff of the armed forces of Russia, said that, “Russia is ready to make joint efforts with China to lift the relationship to a new high.”
After the drills, Liu Zhenli, Commander of China’s 38th Army, said that further SCO military cooperation should seek an expanded “exchange of ideas on tactical thoughts, joint command, and fighting methods of anti-terror operations.”
NATO’s decision to suspend military cooperation and contacts with Russia following Moscow’s annexation of the Crimea is leading Moscow to place more emphasis on strengthening security cooperation with Beijing.
Editor’s Note: China’s support for Russian actions in Ukraine are also important in shaping a venue for increased cooperation. And the withdrawal of Western forces from Afghanistan leaves in play the future of the Central Asian states and their security approaches as well.
The first round of the most tightly contested Brazilian Presidential election in recent memory, which took place on Sunday (5th October 2014), has continued to produce surprises.
143 million Brazilians voted. Since 1996 100% of the voting has been by direct recoding electoral voting machines. So the results were available within a few hours.
President Dilma Rousseff of the Workers Party (PT) led with 42% or 43,2451,176 votes. Marina Silva of the Socialist Party (PSB) had 21% with 22,171,492 votes and came in third.
The three leading candidates in the Brazil election (L-R): Marina Silva, Dilma Rousseff, and Aecio Neves. Silva photo by Percio Campos/EPA; Rousseff, Neves photos by Nelson Almeida/AFP
The big surprise was Aecio Neves of the Social Democratic Party (PSDB) who received 34% of the vote or 34,889,473 votes.
The second round, which will pit President Dilma (66) against Senator Aecio Nevas (54), will take place on October 26th, and will see a revival of the dispute between the PT and PSDB which has polarized Brazilian opinion since 1989.
Their first contest led to the two election victories for PSDB under Fernando Henrique Cardoso (1995-2002), followed by two election victories for the PT under Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (2003-2010).
President Dilma Rousseff’s results in the first round this Sunday, however, were the worst result for an incumbent president in the past two decades.
Dilma’s support in the first round was concentrated in the North East of Brazil where out of every ten votes cast she received 4 votes, winning in every state except Pernambuco (home of former governor Roberto Campos, the presidential candidate killed in a plane crash early in the campaign) and Acre (home of Marina Silva).
Aecio’s support is concentrated in the south and south west of Brazil, and he did particularly well in Sao Paulo, the industrial and financial capital of Brazil.
But Aecio lost his home state of Minas Gerais. where the PT candidate for Governor, Fernando Pimental, ended the 12 year PSDB dominance of the state government.
Former President Lula, who had campaigned actively of the PT, was not able to shake the PSDB control of Sao Paulo, however, where Geraldo Alkamin was relected governor with 57.51% and Jose Serra, the defeated PSDB presidential candidate in the last presidential election, was elected senator by 58.49% of the vote defeating Eduardo Suplicy, the long term PT senator for Sao Paulo.
It is too soon to give much credibility to simulations of the voting on the second round.
Much will depend on where Marina voters go and on Marina’s reaction to her elimination. The breakdown of Marina’s voters suggest that 59% would support Aecio and 24% would support Dilma.
Credit Photo: BBC from Dilma Campaign Headquarters.
Most observers concur that whoever is elected to be the next president, will face major decisions next year. These involve decision over the direction of domestic policy and over the economy, which is in a technical recession.
It also involves questions about how Brazil defines and promotes its national interests, not only within the Western Hemisphere, but also about Brazil’s role in an increasingly fragmented and dangerous world.
The Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal in their editorial pages, which reflect the attitude (or more accurately reflect the conventional wisdom) of members of their respective financial markets in the City of London and on Wall Street, have been both hopeful (when Dilma Rousseff appeared to be in trouble) and depressed (when Dilma’s polling results recuperated.)
The Sao Paulo stock market (BOVESPA) reflects in inverse proportion the same phenomenon: Up when Dilma was down, and down when Dilma was up.
It has been evident for some time that the “markets” wanted “anyone but Dilma.”
This has not changed, nor is it surprising.
The international financial and investment community has long complained about the “interventionist” policies of Dilma’s government.
There was a collective sigh of relief when it appeared that the prospect of her re-election was running into serious trouble, first as a result of her catastrophic loss of public support after the widespread street demonstrations through Brazil last year.
And then again after the tragic death of former Pernambuco Governor and Presidential candidate, Roberto Campos, in a plane crash, which was followed by a dramatic surge of support in the public opinion polls for Marina Silva, his vice-presidential running mate, who had succeed him as the presidential candidate of the Brazilian Socialist Party.
Brazil under Dilma Rousseff has had problematic relationship with the world during her term in office, caused partly by her lack of engagement in international affairs, a striking contrast to the hyper-involvement of her predecessor and political mentor, former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
Dilma Rousseff’s international involvement was also poisoned by the revelation by Edward Snowdon, the former National Security Agency contractor, that United States spy agencies were tapping her cell phone and communications and those of her associates as well as those of Petrobras, the Brazilian State Oil and Gas Company.
Edward Snowdon revealed that the US was also tapping the phone of German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, as well.
But Brazilians do not need lessons from the Americans about phone tapping, which has been common practice in Brazil since the military dictatorship (1964-1985), and long before for that matter. Getulio Vargas (and his agents) during the period of his dictatorship (1930-1945) was a master at such techniques (as well as in avoiding them).
But the revelation of the episode profoundly damaged US-Brazil relations, leading Dilma to cancel her scheduled “State Visit” to President Barack Obama in Washington DC.
Dilma’s foreign policy has been left largely in the hands of her “eminence grise” for foreign policy in the Planalto, Professor Marco Aurelio Garcia, who held the same post of special adviser for foreign affairs in the Planalto under President Lula, and was retained by President Dilma.
Professor Marco Aurelio Garcia has been the great promoter of good relations with Argentina and Venezuela, and has pre-empted in many respects the traditional pre-eminence of Itamaraty and its sophisticated professional corps of diplomats in questions of foreign policy.
But Venezuela and Argentina are both engulfed by self inflicted crises, and Brazil has been damaged and inhibited by the continuing problems both countries, which have had a negative impact most importantly on Brazil’s desire to develop broader trade relationships with Europe.
And it has not helped Brazil’s relationship with the US either.
In many respects Dilma’s foreign policy, under the backroom influence of Professor Garcia, has been the most ideological part of her activity, and while this may please the base of the Worker’s Party (PT), it does not do much for Brazil’s position in the world at large.
The brutally frank comment by the Israeli Foreign Office official, Yigal Palmor, that Brazil was a “diplomatic dwarf” and “an irrelevant diplomatic partner” was unfortunately very close to the mark.
Brazil had criticized Israel’s incursion into Gaza as “disproportionate.” But Brazil has a very large an influential Jewish population as well as a population of Arab origin (especially in Sao Paulo), and the result was disquiet at home from both communities. Brazil has also been absent for any international comment (much less criticism) of the Russian incursion into the Ukraine and its seizure of the Crimea (and there are of course many Brazilians of Ukrainian origin in Southern Brazil).
The pursuit of deals with the BRICS (including the establishment of a BRICS development Bank at the meeting of the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa at Fortaleza in Brazil after the ending of the World Cup), has also come at the cost of silence on critical foreign policy questions, none of which of course helps Brazil’s long lasting desire for a place at the top table as a permanent member of the security council of the UN.
Despite the conviction and imprisonment of former leading PT members in a Congressional vote buying scandal, the rumbling scandal is ongoing.
It involves the massive over-costs at the oil refinery of Abreu e Lima in Pernambuco, and the inflated purchase price paid by Petrobras for a refinery in Pasadena, Texas. It involves as well the massive corruption operation at Petrobras, managed by former Petrobras director, Paulo Roberto Costa (who has turned state’s evidence), and which apparently involves kickbacks paid to over thirty leading congressmen, ministers, governors, and money launderers.
Dilma was previously minister of mines and energy and headed the Petrobras board. Dilma Rousseff, nevertheless, continues to enjoy the support of those who have benefited from her government’s social and income support programs, and who are worried about losing them.
In fact the distrust and hostility of the “markets” only serve to fortify her position. In many respects she is the candidate of continuity.
But if “the markets” reflect the view of London and Wall Street about Dilma this is not an accurate reflection of foreign opinion in all sectors about the Brazilian presidential candidates.
Marina Silva enjoys a very considerable reputation among environmental activists in the United States and in Europe. She is the heir apparent to the legacy of Chico Mendes, the legendry leader of the Amazonian rubber tappers, who was assassinated in 1988.
Chico Mendes was a major player on the international scene, and enjoyed strong support in political and intellectual circles. And Marina’s own biography is unparalleled, even in comparison with Dilma, who has a history of stalwart opposition to the military dictatorship (for which she as imprisoned and tortured).
Presidential candidate Marina Silva of the Brazilian Socialist Party (PSB) gestures as she attends a campaign rally in Sao Bernardo do Campo near Sao Paulo September 19, 2014. REUTERS/Paulo Whitaker
Marina Silva was born on a Seringel Bagaco in Acre in the far west of the Amazon basin, where her rubber tapping father and sisters collected latex. Marina was illiterate until she moved Rio Branco at the age of 16. She suffered from malaria, hepatitis, and metal poisoning. She worked as a maid and leaded to read and write, and went on the university of Acre. She was elected a Workers Party Senator, and was appointed to be Brazil’s environmental minister by president Lula. She does not need to pretend to understand the plight and struggles of Brazil’s poor and marginalized population. She has lived them and overcome both.
Marina was chosen as one of the standard bearers of the Olympic flag at the opening the London Olympic Games, something which surprised and angered the Brazilian government, and led Aldo Rebello, the sport minister, to complain sourly at the time that Marina “has always had good relations with the European aristocracy.”
A prelude in fact to Dilma’s bitter (and inaccurate) televised attacks on Marina as being a creature of the bankers because of the support Marina receives from Maria Alice “Nuca” Setubal, the billionaire heiress to the Itau-Unibanco fortune. Marina was a distinguished speaker in the Earth Day Challenges Action Project at MIT, and she was chosen by “Foreign Policy Magazine” in 2010 as being among the world’s “top global thinkers.”
Marina promised independence to the Central Bank during her campaign. This economic “orthodoxy” generated much criticism of Marina from Dilma and her cohorts, but it has pleased the domestic and international “markets.” Marina is also a Pentacostal Christian, part of the fastest growing movement in Brazil, and a movement with broad international connections both within the United States and throughout Latin America.
This evangelical connection led her to drop her support for gay marriage. But she remains popular among those young people who joined the mass demonstrations on the streets thorough out Brazil last year and for many she was the candidate of hope.
Former governor of Minas Gerais, and a senator from Minas, Aecio Neves, who came in second in the first round and who is running for the Brazilian Social Democratic Party (PBSD), is also viewed as being “market friendly” by the international financial markets, though he is less known internationally than either Dilma or Marina.
Like the late Robert Campos, Neves is heir to a formidable Brazilian political dynasty, a maternal grandson of Tancredo Neves, the wily and experienced Mineiro politician, who was the first civilian elected (by indirectly by the electoral college) to the presidency after the end of the military regime, but who died in 1985 before he took office.
This link to the old political establishment is both an asset (he has experience and a record in government), but it is also at the same time problematic when many Brazilians are looking for change.
Aécio Neves campaign photo. Credit to Aécio Neves
Aecio Neves was, however, a popular governor of Minas Gerais, Brazil’s second most populous state (he left office with 77% approval ratings for running a government deemed “excellent or good”). He introduced a “management shock” whereby he sought to improve heath and public security and cut government expenditures (as well as his own salary). His actions were rewarded by a US$ 200 billion loan to his state from the World Bank.
Aecio Neves has as his principal economic adviser, Arminio Fraga, who is expected to become economy minister if Aecio is elected.
Armino Fraga has a PhD in economics from Princeton, and he worked as a fund manager with George Soros in New York City. He is a former and very successful president of the Brazilian Central Bank between 1999 and 2002 during the Presidency of Fernando Henrique Cardoso, where he is credited re-establishing stability after a floating exchange rate regime was adopted and inflation targeting instituted. Arminio Fraga is, needless to say, very popular among international investors. After leaving the Central Bank, he founded the Rio de Janeiro based asset management company Gavea Investments, which was acquired in 2010 by Highbridge Capital Management, a subsidiary of J P Morgan Asset Management.
Armino Franga made his policy prescriptions for Brazil very clear in an interview with Luciana Magalhaes in The Wall Street Journal in August 2013. Unlike Dilma, who tends to blame Brazil’s economic wows on international economy, Armino Fraga says “our problems are internal as always.”
He placed on a scale of 4 or 5 to 1 the role of domestic as opposed to international problems as they affected the Brazilian economy. He criticizes the manipulation of fuel and energy prices by Dilma’s government, and advocates a return to economic orthodoxy.
He supports as well a liberalization of investment in infrastructure, reform of public lending, a reform of the role of Petrobras, the government controlled oil and gas company which has become “too big,” and to scale back the role of government banks which now control half of banking assets in Brazil. In this sense at least Aecio is the candidate of change.
The coordinator of Aecio Neves’s national defense, foreign policy, and international commercial policy team, is Rubens Barbosa, former Brazilian Ambassador in Washington (1999-2004). He previously was Ambassador in London (1994-1999)
He has criticized Dilma’s foreign policy, most recently her speech at the opening the UN General Assembly in New York, and his view reflects that of many within the Brazilian Foreign Ministry (Itamaraty) which are worried about Brazil’s approximation with Venezuela and Cuba, or what they call “Chavismo light,” after the late populist ruler of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez, and are critical of Brazil’s “Bolivarian” foreign policy with its near neighbors in South America.
Members of the Brazilian military (both active service and retired) have also been in touch with the PSDB. They are concerned not only about the direction of Brazilian foreign policy under Dilma, but also about their salaries, the “socialization” of the country, control of the inland and Amazon borders against illegal immigration, and Dilma’s position on the “truth commission”
Dilma supports in theory the idea of revising the amnesty law which prohibits prosecution of military for acts under the military dictatorship, but her government has not taken any action on the matter.
Barbosa is a senior director of ASG (Albright Stonebridge Group) as well as director of the council of foreign commerce (COSCEX) of the Sao Paulo Confederation of Industries (FIESP).
Not surprisingly the two great protagonists of recent Brazilian political history stand behind their respective presidential hopefuls: Former PT two term president Lula behind Dilma, his protégée, and former PSDB president, Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), behind Aecio.
And both of these “godfathers” have significant international connections.
FHC was exiled in Chile, France, and the United States; the man who introduced of the “Real” plan which killed inflation; holder of many honorary degrees for foreign universities; cosmopolitan and multi-lingual; winner of 2012 John W Kluge Prize for million dollars for achievements in the study of humanity from the US Library of Congress.
Lula, also with strong and long standing international relationships, beginning with the anti-communist American trade union movement; the one of the most popular presidents in Brazilian history. Neither man has put aside their rivalry, which continues, as intensely as ever in this presidential campaign.
The presidential election in Brazil evidently still has surprises in store over the next three weeks.
The race will be increasingly bitter and contested.
Dilma has already said the Brazilian people do not a return “to those who called retirees vagabonds” referring to Fernando Henrique Cardoso. Much mud (on both sides) yet remains to be hurled.
Both the PT and the PSDB have deep roots and much financial support. Marina, even if out of the race, will continue to play an important role, and one thing is certain: She is no friend of Dilma, not only because of past clashes over environmental policy and development projects during the Lula government (disputes which in the end Marina lost), but also because of Dilma’s recourse to underhand attacks on Marina during the first electoral round.
Who will prevail on October 26, therefore, still remains a very open question but decisive for determining the future course of Brazil.
Editor’s Note: A reflection of the global interest in the outcome of the election is reflected in this recent editorial in the Dubai-based Gulf News:
Brazil’s economy is the world’s seventh largest and the country is an important part of the emerging global economic power of the group roughly categorized as the Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa). This means that Brazil’s economic success is a matter of global interest and its current languishing in slow growth is a global problem.
The incumbent government of President Dilma Rousseff has failed to address many of these issues, even if Rousseff‘s Workers Party’s paternal interventionism and its new income redistribution program won unexpected favor with the voters late in the first round of the presidential vote and got her an impressive 41.4 per cent.
She will now face the pro-business Aecio Neves of the Social Democratic party in the second round, who achieved a late surge that boosted his vote to 33.7 per cent, leaving former environment minister Marina Silva, who had led the polls at one stage, well behind with 21.3 per cent.
The next round could be tight and will depend on whether Rousseff succeeds in defending her economic record and continuing to persuade the voters that they will be better off with her, or if Neves succeeds in showing her up for lack of vigor on opening up the economy and developing a more competitive industrial base.
In a recent article in The National Interest, China analyst Gordon Chang focused on how tensions within the Chinese leadership undercut efforts to secure a new positive working relationship with the Indian government.
Chinese leader Xi Jinping was humiliated during his just-completed meeting with his Indian counterpart, Narendra Modi, turning the long-awaited summit into a “fiasco,” according to one observer.
Sino-Indian relations, which were supposed to be propelled to new heights last week, now look troubled, at least in the short term.
In mid-September, Chinese troops crossed the Line of Actual Control, the demarcation of the disputed China-India border, in the Chumar section of eastern Ladakh, high in the Himalayas.
Reinforcements brought their number up to battalion strength, about 1,000 soldiers, according to reports.
Although the Sino-Indian boundary there is ill defined, it was clear China’s commanders intended to create a provocation as they advanced several kilometers on the Indian side of the temporary line…..
Is this simply an “unrelated” event or part of the pressure point of the PLA on the Chinese leader himself?
Foreign analysts have taken both the continuing purges of generals and admirals and the series of flag officer loyalty oaths to Xi as proof of his consolidation of authority over the military, but these events show continued dissension as both the purges and the oaths would be unnecessary if Xi were in control.
Because Xi has made the PLA his power base, he is dependent on the flag officers. The flags may not formally make policy, but they are nonetheless gaining wide latitude to do what they want.
And the Indian reaction?
The provocation damaged Beijing’s reputation in New Delhi, perhaps significantly.
“As the military face-off continued on Friday,” the Times of India noted, “it was clear that the visit of the Chinese president, which held the promise of improving ties, may have in fact aggravated the trust deficit because of the Ladakh incursions.”
ISIS is a brutal force, which asserts that only they have the right to rule in the Middle East and beyond.
We can call them extremist; but that is not enough.
We need to engage in the battle of ideas as well for it is Western secularism and tolerance which is the enemy, not “Jews” or “Christians,” Shiites or Sunni; it is about power dominance via exploiting ideological purity and mobilization of the “faithful” to achieve the purity of rule desired by the ISIS leadership and followers.
Canon Andrew White discusses conditions in Iraq. Listening are Dr. Sarah Ahmed, and Museum’s Chief Program Director, Sarah Ogilvie. Credit: U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum
The week of September 7, 2014 there was an eventful one in Washington DC with many religious leaders trying to bear witness to horror and while forging a unifying message to engage on moral grounds against ISIS.
Seeing ISIS viciousness and deadly intentional “way of war” has now justified a worldwide response to engaging in combat.
Air strikes and whatever is yet to come shows the ability to fight them.
It is in the non-kinetic Information War (IW) aspect of this 21st Century fight that needs to be understood and discussed.
Currently, there are several data points of IW progress to date that must be put in context.
In early August 2014 we had the opportunity to interview Joseph Kassab to discuss a coalition of Christian organizations.
ISIS is clearly targeting the Christians for ideological reasons; when you want to establish a medieval theocracy you want to create the politics of ethnic elimination of your “enemies.” The U.S. stands for secularism in Iraq; ISIS is on a clear direct collision course with U.S. preferences and policies.
As one can see in the above link Senator Cruz was engaged very early in Conference prep and Joseph Kassab is a very smart decent and well-intentioned man.
The stated goal of the event was very direct:
“For too long, Westerners have stood by, silent or unaware, while Christians and other groups in the Middle East have endured discrimination, persecution, and religious cleansing.”
Senator Cruz was well in his right to focus on all those “Christians and other groups” being attacked by killers wishing to not just kill but eradicate them from the face of the earth including Israel and all Jews.
You never invite someone to dinner in America to vilify and boo in a public forum, we are just not that kind of nation. Unfortunately this happened at the dinner event for the conference. Putting it in the past is probably best so as to not allow a PR victory by what appears to be a few IW savvy individuals who for whatever reason who wanted to fracture the unity of purpose of an important and courageous Conference, remember it was during the week of Sept 11.
“Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) is headlining a conference on Wednesday funded by a controversial Clinton donor that will feature pro-Hezbollah and pro-Assad speakers in Washington, D.C.
Meanwhile during the same eventful week Canon Andrew White, known as the Vicar of Baghdad and Sarah Ahmed a Muslim from Iraq visited the Holocaust Museum.
It was a very powerful show of unity of purpose and sends out a powerful IW message.
Canon White brings his personal witness to death and destruction in today’s Iraq to a very important place in America.
The Holocaust Museum stands as a lasting reminder that pure evil does exist and must be identified and stopped.
It is a sad place but also a place for hope and IW action.
For example during the visit there was a news item telling all visitors that the Khmer Rouge Generals, thirty years after being responsible for the killing fields of Cambodia, were being brought to trial.
The museum is an ever vigilant remembrance, but of an ongoing nature.
Sarah Ahmed, the assistant to Canon White, was also on the visit and is a remarkable person and true hero.
Like Canon White she is in a city, Baghdad, where many are targeted for death because of their religious beliefs. She was fearless in speaking out about the impracticality of having a dominant religious leadership running a nation.
She also mentioned pure corruption, often over looked in understanding events in the Middle East.
It was a powerful week for a Religious IW message.
Looking at an earlier statement of another religious figure speaking out against the actions of ISIS:
All this gravely offends God and humanity. Hatred is not to be carried in the name of God. War is not to be waged in the name of God.
On Friday, the pope named Cardinal Fernando Filoni as his personal envoy to Iraq.
Plans are also being made for a meeting in Rome, probably in September, of all the Vatican’s diplomatic representatives in the region.
The aim is to organize support for those who have been forced to flee the jihadists.
The National Catholic Reporter captures with great clarity the moral conundrum of the Pope and the Catholic Church and combat action, it is explained very well in the following story:
“Why Pope Francis supports limited action against Islamic State”
Finally, in IW against ISIS agnostics and atheists have to be taken into account. For some all religion and references to God is pure fairy tale fiction. It is not to say they would see ISIS, a religious force, also being a very real secular threat. It is just a religious message on the bases of a higher moral authority might not resonate.
So the dilemma can be simply put: how to craft a unifying message that can establish common ground for action against Islamic fanatics targeting western secularism and tolerance?
Such a message would need to unify Christians Jews and atheists and even allow Muslims to agree with and that is the crux of the IW battle.
On January 6 1941 President Franklin Roosevelt gave his State-of-the-Union Speech and he brilliantly articulated “The Four Freedom Speech
Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Worship
Freedom from Want
Freedom from Fear
America was not yet at war, but Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia and Imperial Japan were all showing their abject hatred personified by the word Freedom. The genius of President Roosevelt’s speech is that it was not a battle cry for war it was a statement of principle for all humanity to rally around.
It is a perfect list to capture the goals of why a Nation and people can and should fight to defend four elegant and essential freedoms that can make the world a better place.
Just identifying and reaching back to The Four Freedoms is not enough. Instead use it as a simple litmus test. Every organization and person mentioned above including atheists in understanding the horror and goals of Islamic fundamentalism can embrace the Four Freedoms, it is in their DNA.
The critical test is what do with Islamic Organization who wish to send a message of peace and their agreement with The Four Freedoms.
A very simple test has just been identified by a very powerful and successful world class PR Firm Burson-Marsteller LLC who have arranged to represent for a fee the Ennahda Party of Tunisia:
Just released government filings reveal that the PR agency has been hired to improve the foreign image of Tunisia’s Ennahda Party, the Muslim Brotherhood of Tunisia. They will “arrange meetings between Ennahdha representatives and stakeholders” and provide Ennahda “support on media and stakeholder outreach in advance of upcoming elections.”
A simple question, which would clarify the situation can be posed and answered:
Would the Ennahada Party accept the Four Freedoms? Would Iran? Hamas? Hezbollah? The Islamic Society of Boston?
Would CARE, The Council on America-Islamic Relations “Making Democracy Work for Everyone” support ALL Four Freedoms?
If CARE would just do that it would be a tremendous IW victory against fanaticism in whatever form it takes.
Let an IW battle begin in support of the Four Freedoms and let a public record be established.
In a September 25, 2014 Press Release from Airbus Defense and Space, the flight of the Zephyr over the UAE was highlighted.
Airbus Defence and Space announced today that a team comprising engineers from the Emirates Institution for Advanced Science and Technology (EIAST) and the Airbus Zephyr program has successfully completed the first civil flight of the Airbus Zephyr High Altitude Pseudo-Satellite (HAPS).
The flight, completed last week in Dubai, achieved the highest altitude ever reached in the United Arab Emirates, 61,696 ft., and by completing a full day / night cycle of operation also recorded the longest flight of any aircraft within the UAE.
The Zephyr as seen in the UAE. Credit: The National
The flight was approved by the Dubai Civil Aviation Authority (DCAA) and represents the first time that a HAPS operation has been authorised by a civil authority. “DCAA are proud to have been able to support EIAST and Airbus to complete the first flight of a High Altitude pseudo-satellite in the UAE.” said Michael Rudolph of the Dubai Civil Aviation Authority (DCAA).
He went on to explain the importance of the operation, “By working closely with EIAST, Airbus, DCAA, Sheikh Zayed Centre and our military Air Force colleagues we have been able to complete not only the first flight of such a novel air vehicle but also safely manage a flight to above 60,000 feet close to one of the three busiest airports in the world. This shows that Dubai and the DCAA hold a leading position in developing and implementing procedures and policies for the safe and efficient operation of UAVs within the region”
Sarah Amiri, EIAST Programme manager for the Advanced Aerial Systems Programme said “This has been an outstanding cooperation between Airbus, EIAST and the Dubai CAA and we are delighted that within a few short months we have integrated, tested and flown such an advanced unmanned aircraft and been able to demonstrate a number of applications that are critical to Dubai and the wider world.”
“The flight in Dubai demonstrated the ability of Zephyr to operate in regions of the world’s most crowded airspaces”, said Chris Kelleher, Technical Director of the Airbus HAPS program.
”I am immensely grateful for the support and diligence of the Dubai CAA and other authorities in working closely with the combined EIAST Airbus Team to ensure a safe and successful stratospheric flight. With all systems working well in temperatures ranging between +40oC and -80oC and up to a maximum altitude of 61,696ft, this flight further reinforces confidence in Zephyr for users and regulators.”
According to a story published in the UAE publication The National and published on September 24, 2014 (excerpts only for the full article click on the link below).
It is thought that the drones, which fly in the earth’s stratosphere high above commercial aircraft, could be used as cheaper, more easily customizable satellites, or even used to boost internet connections in remote parts of the country.
“It’s similar to a satellite,” said Salem Humaid Al Marri, the assistant director general for scientific and technical affairs at EIAST.
“But you can bring it down, change the payload and put it back up again. It’s very flexible, in ways that a satellite is not.”
The drone, which is known as a High Altitude Pseudo Satellite (Haps), is a lightweight, unmanned aircraft that weighs not more than 34 kilograms.
It has a wingspan of 18 metres and is able to fly at an altitude of 65,000 feet, although it flew at 61,500 feet during a test flight.
The propeller-powered drone uses electricity generated from high-tech solar panels across its wings, and it can remain airborne for about two weeks without having to land…..
Mr Al Marri said he hoped the UAE would have at least five of the drones eventually, which would not only fulfill an imaging role but would also serve as stationary communications satellites, boosting internet and telecommunications access in remote areas of the country.
“I’d say we’re 10 years away from that,” he said.
“But we’re investing in these technologies now, so we can provide such services in the future…..”
“These aircraft act as temporary, cheap satellites that are flexible in terms of what payload you decide to carry. But they cannot take the place of a real satellite.”
Air-traffic congestion is one of the biggest challenges that EIAST expects to face.
“It flew right next to one of the world’s top three busiest airports, and in the busiest airspace in the world,” said Ms Amiri.
“That was the biggest concern, but the aircraft performed really well.”
New Delhi. Indian scientists successfully maneuvered their Mars Orbiter Mission (MOM) spacecraft into the Martian orbit Sep 24, and created history by doing so in the maiden attempt.
The first to congratulate the scientists was Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who visited the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) headquarters in India’s aerospace city of Bangalore to witness the momentous occasion and share the joy with the scientists as soon as the MOM was injected into the orbit at 7.54 am (IST) after a 24-minute firing of the onboard 440 Newton Liquid Apogee Motor (LAM). “The success will go down as a landmark in history,” he observed.
Also to congratulate on ISRO’s efforts with Beyond the Blue were President Pranab Mukherjee, Vice Preisdent Hamid Ansari and thousands of citizens including children aspiring to be astronauts.
That the MOM, also called Mangalyaan (literally moon craft in Hindi) was successfully swung into the red planet’s orbit was also confirmed from US NASA’s space centers around the world, including at Goldstone, Madrid (Spain) and Canberra (Australia). NASA, whose MAVEN spacecraft is in the Martian orbit since Sep 21, flashed congratulations on its website to compliment ISRO and India.
ISRO’s huge Deep Space Network (DSN) radars, with huge antennas, located at Bayalu near Bangalore, were receiving signals from MOM, and later during the day, it was set to take pictures in accordance with the commands already loaded in onboard computers.
The DSN is similar in capability with NASA’s global facilities to monitor deep space traffic.
The 475-kg Mangalyaan is carrying five scientific instruments to study the Mars’ surface for water, methane and its mineral and chemical composition. The presence of methane, if confirmed, will be the first sign to indicate that life exists on the red planet in some form.
Indian scientists indicated that ISRO and NASA have always been cooperating and that a data exchange between the two institutions about their Martian spacecraft was likely. Right now, India and US are only two countries in the world to have Mars missions and their MAVEN and Mangalyaan comfortable neighbours to each other.
ISRO has already achieved success in launching an unmanned moon mission, Chandrayaan (or moon craft) in 2008. This was the first to locate water on the surface of moon with sophisticated sensors built by US defence company Raytheon but contributed by a US university.
NASA says that there should have been water on Mars. “Mars was once awash with water. With the arrival of Nasa’s Maven mission at the red planet, we may finally be close to working out where it all went.”
ISRO Chairman K Radhakrishnan said India had proved “our technological capabilities in outer space missions with an indigenous rocket and our own spacecraft.”
Set up in 1969, ISRO initiated space efforts with very modest assistance from the US but then built a satellite, Aryabhatta, which was launched by the Soviet Union on 19 April 1975.
ISRO has sent numerous satellites ever since, using its PSLV (Polar Satellite Launch Vehicles) and GSLV (Geosynchronous Satellite Launch Vehicle) rockets for placing payloads in polar and geostationary orbits respectively. It has eight onboard thrusters which use liquid fuel as well as solar energy.
Compared to 365 days of earth to orbit the sun, Mars takes 687 days, and like the earth, it also has days and nights. The Mars day however is for 24 hours and 37 minutes, or a bit longer than that of the earth. MOM’s solar panels can generate electricity only when they get sun.
ISRO’s only weakness yet in proulsion technology has been in cryogenic rockets but authoritative sources told India Strategic that it is also now a few months away.
“May be one or two more launches, and then this would be confirmed.”
In fact, HAL, which makes propulsion systems for ISRO, announced that it is partnering with ISRO to make cryogenic systems. HAL Chairman Dr RK Tyagi said: An Integrated Cryogenic Engine manufacturing Facility) ICMF) will be set up at HAL’s Aerospace Division here, and it will manufacture cryogenic/ semi cryogenic engines for ISRO.”
Although France, Russia (earlier Soviet Union) and US have cooperated with India in varying degrees on the space frontier, none has shared the cryogenic technology. US aerospace company Boeing at one time offered only “cryogenic tanks” but it was perhaps not accepted by India as being too little.
Notably, Russia did give half a dozen engines of older technology and without the data on how to use them. “The experience in handling them was useful nonetheless, and two private companies, Godrej and MTAR Technologies, have contributed a lot in this direction.
Built at a small cost of about US$ 70 million (Rs 450 crores), MOM was launched on 5 November 2013 through a PSLV from India’s only spaceport at Sriharikota in the Bay of Bengal, some 80 km from Chennai, the capital of India’s southern state of Tamil Nadu. MOM travelled some 650 million km over nine months to reach the designated orbit.
It is orbiting around the Mars just 423 km at the closest point and some 80,000 km at the farthest point. Scientists use gravity of the planets and the sun to sling manmade spacecraft into desired orbits and that was done in this case also.
MOM has been built indigenously but several off the shelf commercially available components were acquired from the global markets as per the standard global practice. There are plenty of critical items like inertial guidance systems that are not made in India, due either to lack of technology or commercial viability. It makes sense to buy them from wherever.
India is the fourth country at present after US, Russia and France (+Europe) with capability to launch missions of this scale.
India’s Space and Nuclear programmes are controlled directly by the Prime Minister’s office. In fact nearly all the Prime Ministers, notably Mrs Indira Gandhi, Mr Rajiv Gandhi, Mr A B Vajpayee, Dr Manmohan Singh and now Mr Modi have shown keen interest in steering them to success and new frontiers.
