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.
2014-06-24 Last week, one of our SLD colleagues received this message from an American in Iraq about the situation at that time.
Huge stockpiles of US armor, weapons, heavy artillery, mortars, armored vehicles, tanks, the entire main weapons depot and the main helicopter base, have been captured, mostly intact, by ISIS.
The largest oilfield in Iraq has also been captured by ISIS.
Iraqi Kurdish forces take position near Taza Khormato as they fight jihadist militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) positioned five kilometers away in Bashir on June 23, 2014. Credit Photo: Karim Sahib /AFP/Getty Images
No US airstrikes, and none are likely any time soon.
US State Department is providing zero support to contractors and other Americans still here.
Water, ammunition, and other critical supplies are not being delivered to what few Iraqi troops there are who have not already ripped-off their uniforms and fled.
All Americans, including me, are trying desperately to get out.
Fighting is bitter!
ISIS does not take prisoners.
ISIS is murdering/slaughtering captives and non-combatants alike.
Like the NVA in Vietnam in the 1960s, ISIS has hit-lists with names of government officials, opposition, police military personnel.
All are marked for death.
The ultimate slaughter will defy imagination!
Kurds in the mountains are establishing their own state. They, correctly, have zero faith in any US-sponsored central government.
In short, it is total chaos here.
It feels like the fall of Vietnam all over again!
And in a piece from 2012 published on the SLD Forum, it is clear that this outcome was predictable.
When the F-35B goes to England this summer and makes appearances at two air shows, the focus will be upon the plane and its first appearance at a major air show.
But in reality, the focus needs to be on the arrival of the first operational squadron of F-35s, which is embedded in the USMC aviation enterprise at Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Arizona.
The squadron is being shaped for its inclusion into the Marine Corps air role via its working relationship with MAWTS.
According to one of the MAWTS officers interviewed for this article via teleconference, the advantage of MAWTS and VMFA 121 working together is crucial for the evolution of the way ahead.
We have developed the infrastructure and process for the standardization of the F-35B within the USMC. We can do this by working directly with the only operational fleet squadron. We can take that forward to future squadrons as they are stood up. We build out a standardized approach.
And we can introduce the rest of the USMC who participates in the exercises at MAWTS about the capabilities of the F-35 and how those capabilities can change how the MAGTF can operate. We can show battalion Marines on the ground how this aircraft is going to enhance their operational capabilities.
A key component of our decision to start out in Yuma was driven by the fact Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactic Squadron One, the world’s premier organization for the development and employment of aviation weapons and tactics, is co-located on that base. MAWTS-1 is staffed with individuals of superior aeronautical and tactical expertise who are subject matter experts in every element of the Marine air/ground task force.
In my view, some of the greatest minds in modern aviation reside in that squadron. The commander is one of the best thinkers at the colonel level in the Corps today and his team has been charged by the current Deputy Commandant for Aviation to work with VMFA-121 to speed the development of future tactics and standardization in the F-35.
These two squadrons, operating side-by-side at MCAS Yuma, are going to reap incredible dividends for Marine aviation.
To get a sense of how MAWTS is working with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron (VMFA) 121, we had a chance to talk with Major Douglas A. Seich and Major Roger “HASMAT” Greenwood.
Both are Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron One instructors. A follow up discussion with Major Noble added further details with regard to the MAWTS working relationship with VMFA in preparing for the introduction of the F-35B into the Marine Corps.
Earlier, in our discussion with Greenwood, the Major highlighted that:
The Marines are in an interesting spot, as we will have the plane first and can provide some insights into how the tactics and operational concepts will change with the plane.
We can provide inputs to our Navy brethren with regard to these developments. We will be leading forward on the impact of the F-35 transition for our sister services.
According to the two MAWTS instructors, the F-35 Department was set up at MAWTS in January 2014. They are the two instructors within the department for now but by the Spring of 2016, MAWTS will be taking its first F-35 students which is anticipated to initially number 2 or 3.
They have been working with others at Yuma and the sister services in shaping the Tactics and Training Manuals, which form an essential part of the standup of a squadron for a new aircraft.
The process is working through the migration of a basic set of training manuals (the 1000 level) to higher levels for the evolution of tactics (6000 and higher) is depicted in the table below.
Adapted from NAVMC 3500.14C, August 23, 2011.
The Tactics Manuals (which have a classified – 3.1 — and unclassified version – 3.3.) are being worked by MAWTS interacting with the experience of VMFA 121.
Obviously, both manuals are works in progress and will be re-shaped with the operational experiences of the F-35B in combat in the years ahead. Personnel will cycle through from operational squadrons to rewrite and rework the manuals.
Another adjustment will be the shift from the current aviators with combat experience on legacy platforms, to new pilots who will not have that experience.
With the pilots with legacy experience, the challenge is to adapt to the plane, and to rethink operational approaches. With new pilots without that experience, it is not about applying the old to the new, it is about shaping the way ahead with the plane around which they will learn how to fly and fight.
There are different communities within USMC TACAIR, all of which will in the future converge to one platform: the F-35. The Prowler, Harrier and Hornet pilots will now become F-35 pilots.
As one of the MAWTS instructors put it: “The different backgrounds will provide a leg up for each of them in working a specific aspect of the F-35. The Hornet pilots will grasp air to air more rapidly than the other two, and vice-versa.”
The 17 pilots from VMFA 121 fly with the two pilots from MAWTS in interactively shaping evolving tactics for the aircraft as it matures.
Three F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters with Marine Fighter Attack Squadron 121, 3rd Marine Aircraft Wing, and two AV-8B Harriers with Marine Attack Squadron 211, 3rd MAW, fly in a “V” formation during fixed-wing aerial refueling training over eastern California, Aug. 27. The F-35B joint strike fighters practiced refueling with Marine Aerial Refueler Transport Squadron 352. (Photo by Lance Cpl. Michael Thorn)
According to MAWTS, the 121 squadron has been participating in the exercises run for the Weapons and Tactics Instruction Course (WTI) courses , which are done for training and tactics development. MAWTS does two a year. In these courses, air is working within the MAGTF approach and Marine ground forces participate in the WTI courses as well.
In the Fall of 2013, 121 participated in three WTI events and in the last course during the Spring of 2014, 121 participated in six events. To date the F-35Bs in the WTI events have performed SCAR (strike coordination and reconnaissance), escort and area defense missions.
The current planes are operating with Block 2A software and the Block 2B software arrives later this year for the preparation for the IOC in 2015. What this means is that the plane operating today with MAWTS is more limited than what will come later in the year. While Block 2B is largely a software upgrade, there are some planned hardware mods as well.
The F-35 is operating with other Marine Corps air as the blue team against red aggressors in various exercises.
This means that already the Marines are working the question of 5th generation aircraft working with 4th generation to shape tactics and training for more effective air operations.
This has meant as well that the combat systems on the F-35 have already demonstrated an ability to enhance the impact of F-18s and Harriers on air combat operations.
As one of the MAWTS instructors put it:
We are able to employ the F-35 as a kind of information manger using its combat systems to be able to employ the air ordinance carried by the other airplanes which allows us to conserve our ordinance on the F-35 until we actually need to use it.
This has already led to interesting results when doing things like the defense of Yuma exercise where the F-18s were enabled to do things they can not normally do against incoming USAF aircraft as the Red Force.
In this WTI event – Anti-Air Warfare 2 – the F-35 participated with 4th generation fighters from MAWTS against a Red Force, which included F-15s and F-16s. Because of the F-35’s combat systems, the participating 4th generation fighters were significantly more effective. Right now, the F-35 can be used to generate sensor data, which enhances the capability of the 4th generation fleet, limited by the current need to pass that data via voice means; and the F-35s ability to operate more freely in the battlespace than can 4th generation aircraft.
A key rupture for the USMC ground element is to experience how the combat systems of the F-35 can change their operational approaches as well.
It is not just about flying artillery in support of the Ground Combat Element (GCE); it is a 360-degree flying combat system enabling the GCE. The plane is designed for the intertwined battlefield in which ordinance, C2, ISR, and other assets carried by the F-35 provide swiss army tool sets to support the GCE.
Yuma AZ US – A Marine Corps firefighter with Marine Corps Air Station Yuma’s aircraft rescue and fire fighter unit attaches a hook to one of the hook points on the F-35B during an aircraft lift training exercise at MCAS Yuma, Feb. 8, 2013.
The instructors also discussed the working of the training and tactics approaches of the three services whereby there is convergence, but, of course, differences among the mission sets of the services.
As one of the instructors put it:
We obviously talk regularly with the Air Force and the Navy as we put our manuals together.
It is a good idea to cross-pollinate between the various communities.
We expect our work on Close Air Support to become the gold standard as well as the USAF with regard to shaping air dominance in using the aircraft.
The USAF is going to spend a lot of their time focused on air dominance and they’re going to build those chapters up with more detail than we would typically focus on so we can leverage their work.
Basic training by the three services is different and will persist, yet commonalities will be enhanced.
Another issue is the nature of the F-35 as a multi-role aircraft, combing close-air support (CAS) with air dominance capabilities.
This means that Marine Corps pilots will operate in both modes, and expect to partner closely with the USAF and the USN on these blended mission sets. The Marines for a considerable period of time have focused primarily on CAS but in the evolving strategic environment in order to support the insertion of the MAGTF the role of the F-35 as part of a joint or coalition force establishing air dominance will be enhanced.
And for MAWTS this means shaping both training and tactics manuals, training and exercises, which prepares pilots for this hybrid operational environment.
The Pacific theater is not Afghanistan.
As one MAWTS instructor highlighted: “We have to focus on developing our skill sets for all the roles which the F-35 will be used for, not just CAS.”
Editor’s Note: We are following up with this teleconference interview with a visit to Yuma Marine Corps Air Station in July 2014 with interviews with both the F-35 squadron and MAWTS-1
YUMA, Ariz. – Hundreds of Marines from units throughout the Corps filled the Sonoran Pueblo club aboard Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz., April 27, to see their hard work and dedication come to fruition.
This is the day these Marines have waited 7 long strenuous weeks for – graduation day. After countless 15-hour work days over a span of what may have seemed like an eternity, they have officially graduated from Weapons and Tactics Instructor course 2-14.
Major Brett McGregor, Tactical Air Department Head for Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron 1 and WTI instructor, still remembers how he felt on his graduation day four years ago. “I remember being a student and the feeling was exhaustion on that day. It is also a lot of relief and a lot of pride because they definitely earned it,” said McGregor. “They should be proud of what they’ve done. Seven weeks doesn’t sound long but, when you are here doing it as a student, it is very long and you get a feeling that you don’t quite know what just happened.”
McGregor explained that most students don’t fully understand what they have just accomplished. That feeling sets in once they’ve left Yuma, returned to their units and suddenly regarded differently. They are looked at as a person who is an expert, not only in their area of responsibility, but also in the components and aspects of the Marine Air Ground Task Force as a whole.
“Though the course was just extensive planning, it was an extremely challenging curriculum,” said Capt. Michael Radigan, a pilot with Marine Helicopter Light Attack Training Squadron 303 and WTI 2-14 student. “You get to do and see things that you’ll never get to do in training otherwise. The experiences that I’ve had here will definitely prepare me for any future operations.”
Guest speaker, Lt. Gen. Jon M. Davis, Deputy Commander of United States Cyber Command, and now Deputy Commandant of USMC Aviation (designate) addresses the audience of the Weapons and Tactics Instructor Course 2-14 graduation ceremony. Soon after Davis’ speech the students of WTI 2-14 graduated and received their certificates at the Sonoran Pueblo aboard Marine Corps Air Station Yuma, Ariz., April 27, 2014.
One of the main missions of WTI is to put together a venue where the capabilities of Marine Corps aviation can be maximized. Specifically, what makes Marine Corps aviation very unique and effective, is the ability to integrate all the capabilities into a single goal.
That joint collaboration allows the Marine Corps aviators to execute as part of a MAGTF. “In order to capitalize on all the capabilities that [Marine Corps aviation] has, you have to bring everyone together in one location and plan and execute together,” said McGregor. “As a student, it is not a test to see how good they are at flying their aircraft, it’s a test to see how well you can fight with the MAGTF as a whole; how well you can fit into the team and be effective from the bigger picture.”
Part of the training consists of learning how to execute operations to support the ground units; the pilots become their eye in the sky. For example, when doing the planning for training exercises, the ground combat department at MAWTS-1 is always present to ensure that coordination with the ground units is at the forefront of the pilots’ minds.
“I’ll continue to teach, continue to practice, and instill flying tactically sound, holding the highest standards possible,” said Radigan. “Most important is to remember that the only reason we exist as pilots is to support that guy on the ground.”
During the WTI course there are multiple training evolutions. Different infantry units come here from installations Corps-wide to conduct pre-deployment type training in conjunction with the pilots. This gives both the ground and aviation components a realistic experience of what they may encounter overseas.
“These exercises accomplish pre-deployment training as well as integrating the MAWTS-1 air component to get some training that they probably couldn’t get done otherwise, since there are so many aircraft utilized during the course,” said McGregor. “It’s a great opportunity for both sides to get some really good training accomplished.”
Twice a year, during WTI, over 4,000 augments arrive on station to participate in the course. To support this population explosion and enable WTI to run smoothly, station personnel put in hundreds, if not thousands, of behind-the-scenes hours.
“We bring in augment [WTI] instructors and other additional augments for duties to make this place run,” said McGregor. “Gate guards, chow hall, combat camera, maintainers, explosive ordnance people, that’s just the tip of the iceberg of examples of who is brought in from other bases in support of WTI.”
One of the key components that make this course a success is the support the station receives during WTI from the local community. “We get a lot of community support where everybody thinks this is a good idea and that this is a good experience not only for us but for them,” said McGregor. “It’s also really hard to find good training space like this these days. We have all this open area to work with in all the ranges.”
Graduating from the course is a great honor that only a handful of service members have the opportunity to accomplish; especially since students must be selected in order to attend the course. The Marine selected is generally someone who has excelled in the Marine Corps, is good at their particular job, and has shown the capacity to train. The WTI instructors are building these students into capable instructors; sharing knowledge and expertise. These students were identified by their command as someone who has the potential to make their unit better when they return.
Preparation is key; studying and training are essential in the weeks before coming to the WTI course. “You need to show up ready. What we tell the Marines when they check in is that this is a marathon of an event; it takes a lot of effort to get through, you have to pace yourself,” said McGregor. “Before coming you have to have a basic level of preparation or else you are going to fall out on mile seven of the run.”
As for the future of WTI and MAWTS-1, the course as a whole will remain similar to the present curriculum. In about 2 years, MAWTS-1 expects their first F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter pilots to participate in the course.
On June 3 Moscow announced that it was lifting its earlier embargo on arms sales to Pakistan and negotiating with Islamabad to supply the Pakistanis with Mi-35 Hind attack helicopters (a helicopter already being used in Afghanistan by the US with its Afghan allies as well).
Though this announcement probably surprised many observers, in fact it comes after a long effort. For example, there are a series of articles in the Pakistani press going back to 2011-12 calling for Pakistan and Moscow to mend fences and enhance their bilateral relations, for example by negotiating an arms sales package. And there is no doubt that prior to this announcement that serious high-level discussions occurred between both governments as the arms sales are clearly not an isolated deal but part of a broader diplomatic rapprochement.
To be sure there are good reasons for Pakistan to prefer Russian weapons at this stage to its habitual reliance on Western, especially American systems.
The Mi-35M is a multi-role combat helicopter manufactured by Rostvertol, a subsidiary of Russian Helicopters. It is an export variant of Mi-24 Hind attack helicopter.
While nobody disputes the superior quality of most US systems; they are considerably more expensive and in many cases, as India has found, Russian weapons are good enough for executing the missions necessary to operate in the South Asian theaters.
At the same time Western analysts believe that there is a possibility that Pakistan might be able to acquire better technologies than it obtains from China.
However, this announcement raises some important strategic and political issues for India and its relations with Russia.
India, as Simon Wezeman of SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) observes, is not only a major customer for Russian weapons and Moscow’s main market for arms sales but also the financier that Moscow needs to finance the development of new weapons like the new Fighter jet PAKFA. Moscow can ill afford to alienate New Delhi.
Nevertheless previous arms sales, the SU-30 Fighter, T-90 tanks, and the Gorshkov Aircraft Carrier debacle (it was to be retrofitted for India in 2008 at cost and ended up costing between $2-3 billion before it finally was sold in 2013) all revealed serious defects and mounting Indian criticism over issues of the price and quality of Russian weapons.
India has increased its engagement with Western countries and firms for its airpower requirements. It is to receive the French Rafael as its major multi mission combat aircraft, and is the largest operator of C-17s outside of the United States, are examples of this trend. Therefore Moscow may reasonably be searching to diversify its customer base for arms sales to preempt or cushion the blow of potentially fewer arms sales to India.
But beyond these considerations there are also other political and strategic factors at work or potentially at work here.
Hitherto Russia embargoed arms sales to Pakistan because it deemed Pakistan a major sponsor of terrorism in Afghanistan, India and potentially through its proxies in Central Asia. It also regarded Pakistan as the real proliferation threat.
Yet there is no public sign of what changed its mind concerning the utility of arms sales to Pakistan. Very probably this change has much to do with the impending Western withdrawal from Afghanistan, an event that fills Moscow with anxiety given its well-advertised pessimism about the future staying power of the next Afghan government.
This could lead it to seek new avenues of influence on Pakistan while simultaneously trying to exploit the visible chasm in Pakistani-US relations.
Nevertheless this sale has already incurred strong Indian complaints.
The Russian press reports that India told Russian officials once these discussions were announced that they were concerned about Moscow’s effort to exploit the interregnum between Indian governments by announcing these talks just as the new Prime Minister Narenda Mori was assuming office.
Furthermore Indian officials have dropped unofficial hints of an “us or them” choice to Moscow and told Moscow that after Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin told the Indian media in 2012 to “spit on my face” if Russia were to arm India’s enemies.[ref] Rajiv Sharma, “India fuming over Russia lifting its Pakistan arms embargo, what next?,” Russia Today, June 6, 2014,http://rt.com/op-edge/164148-india-russia-pakistan-embargo/[/ref]
Pakistan’s motives in the Russian arms deal appear to be somewhat less opaque. According to Topychkanov Pakistan harbors concerns about excessive dependence on its “all-weather friend” China and wants to diversify its suppliers and obtain improved technology and offset that one-sided dependence on China.
Pakistan may clearly want to draw closer to Moscow to elicit Russian help in meeting its urgent energy problems, especially as the US-sponsored TAPI pipeline (Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India) to bring Turkmen gas through Afghanistan to Pakistan and India is going nowhere and an alternative Iranian-Pakistani-India pipeline (IPI) also appears to be a distant prospect.
Finally there is a more speculative possibility that remains to be verified but bears watching.
Opening ceremony of the Russia-China Naval Interaction 2014 joint exercises. May 20, 2014. Credit: RIA, Novosti.
Russia’s announcement coincides with Chinese overtures to the new Mori government. Clearly China wants to prevent India from becoming too pro-Western and to prevent an Indo-Pakistani clash or even a deterioration of relations, especially as Afghanistan’s future becomes more uncertain. Those actors also aggravate China’s already heightened concerns over Muslim terrorism, which is clearly rising in China and behind which Pakistan is to dome degree involved.
Indeed, both Moscow and Beijing have ample reason to be concerned about the trajectory of trends in Indo-Pakistani relations, Indo-Western relations, and the future of Afghanistan.
And all these issues are linked together and may become even more interlinked over time.
Meanwhile due to Ukraine and the overall estrangement of Russia from the West Russo-Chinese cooperation appears to be growing.
Is it therefore too much to suspect that we may be seeing a coordinated partnership strategy taking place here as both sides try to repair relations with the two key powers in South Asia from whom they have been estranged to facilitate further cooperation in South and Central Asia at Washington’s expense?
The existence of such cooperation cannot be assumed in the absence of evidence, let alone be proved; yet the possibility of such cooperation must be raised, especially as we see the new energy deal and Russia’s willingness to participate in China’s Silk Road through Central Asia.
Therefore the inherently significant move by Russia to end its embargo on arms sales to Pakistan may turn out to be part of an even broader geopolitical realignment.
If for no other reason than this these impending arms sales merit our closest scrutiny.
Stephen Blank is a Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council in Washington DC.
For other stories focusing on arms sales and other dynamics in the region see the following:
The Mi-35M is primarily designed for attack and military transport missions, the helicopter delivers superior flight performance and maneuverability than its predecessor. The production of Mi-35M started in 2005.
The aircraft integrates modern high-precision weaponry for destroying ground-based armoured targets and providing air support for ground missions.
It can be modified as an attack, ground assault, medical evacuation (MEDEVAC) or transport platform.
The Mi-35M is one of the modern combat helicopters in the Russian Air Force inventory. It is also operated by the armed forces of Venezuela, Brazil and Azerbaijan.
2014-06-19 With the first Russian Mistral completed and with the second ship on its way, the key moment has arrived to train the Russians to operate the ship.
Training is crucial because the ship is so different from any ship the Russians have operated in the past.
The Mistral is highly automated compared to Russian ships and will operate with a significantly smaller crew size.
According to a piece by Pierre Tran of Defense News published in 2012:
The smaller crew is possible due to a high level of automation on the French ships, designed by prime contractor DCNS. The crews require intense training, with a year needed to certify senior officers, the French Navy officer said.
Russian Navy planners and deck officers will probably need two or three years to learn how to operate the new ships to their full capabilities. That was how long it took the French Navy to adapt to the Mistral, which serves as an amphibious assault ship housing about 450 troops, deploying helicopters, landing craft, and carrying onboard a field hospital and headquarters command center.
The moment has now come upon the French to train Russian sailors on French soil.
BPC Valdivostok at Saint-Nazaire. Credit: Kevin Izorce
The only small problem is that Russia has seized Crimea, broadly threatens Ukraine and its President asserts the right to protect Russians living in other European states, and has dramatically increased the concerns of Baltic and Nordic states.
One example is clearly Poland.
According to a piece in the Polish press published June 13, 2014, the Poles see a direct threat to their Baltic coast from the Russian military and clearly the Russian Mistral could be part of enhanced capabilities to execute such a threat.
The Russians are capable of landing a battalion-sized force from Baltiysk on the Polish coast within an hour and a half.
The modernization of the Polish Navy will cost 17 billion zlotys. This is a small sum compared to, for example, the costs of the air and missile defense program. The procurement plans do not provide for new submarines to be equipped with cruise missiles.
Meanwhile, the Russians are developing the most cutting-edge offensive methods and maintaining the highest concentration of military forces in the entire Russian Federation in the Kaliningrad enclave. The Russians began another round of warship exercises in the Baltic on 10 June.
Meanwhile, the Russians are to show up in France for training on a ship, which the Poles fear directly, threatens them. This is hardly the kind of European solidarity, which France wants to demonstrate.
Comments from the US are invoked in the French press suggesting this is a US-French issue; whatever the French position, the French sale of Mistral is of central significance to the European Union and European defense – forget the US and focus on its impact on Europe itself. This is part of Russian strategy towards Europe and only secondarily towards the United States. Putin has calculated that he has little to be concerned with regard to President Obama, and is unleashing his European strategy.
It is simply not realized that Putin does not accept the post-Soviet order imposed on Russia. From this standpoint, his position is not dissimilar from those Germans who felt the same way about the imposition of the Versailles treaty on Germany after World War I
400 Russian sailors are due this month to come to Saint-Nazaire for training. They were due to arrive originally on the 22nd and 23rd of June at the port and to live off of a Russian warship. This would be a great photo opportunity!
According to the French naval website, Mer et Marine, “there is a communication blackout from French authorities and industry concerning the subject of the arrival date… But to deliver the two ships will require crew training.”
The sailors will receive several months of training to operate the Russian Mistral.
Indeed, the Russians have been involved from the beginning in building their Mistral.
The St Petersburg-based Baltiysky Zavod (Baltic Shipyard) is responsible for construction of stern section blocks for the two Russian Mistral ships.
The completed stern sections were then towed to the STX yard in Saint-Nazaire for mating with the French-built forward sections.
The agreed plan is that the third and fourth planned Mistrals are to be constructed entirely in Russia by Baltic Yards.
But Putin assured the French and others in 2010 that they had nothing to worry about when the Mistral enters the Russian fleet.
“For us, this deal is interesting only if it is accomplished with a parallel transfer of technology, so that our shipbuilders – both civilian and military – receive a new technological boost for development,” Putin said in an interview with Agence France Presse and France 2 TV.
The prime minister, who will visit France on Thursday and Friday, also said that “cooperation in a field as sensitive as military-industrial manufacturing, of course, leads to higher trust between countries.”
Putin reiterated that Georgia and other Russian neighbors should not fear the Mistral purchase because Moscow has no plans to attack other countries and hopes there will never again be a conflict similar to five-day war between Russia and Georgia in 2008.
“You know, it is not the case when it is necessary to deploy weaponry as the Mistral ship. I hope that, God willing, we will never see a military conflict between Russia and Georgia. Never,” he said, before pointing out that Russia was able “to carry out military strikes from the Russian territory at any target in Georgia.”
“We do not need a Mistral ship for that,” he said.
But this need not happen.
It is important to remember that France has played a crucial role before in dealing with Russian pressures on Europe. It is important for the current Administration to remember French history.
Then French President Mitterrand firmly committed France to resist the Russian divide and conquer strategy. Indeed his speech in the Bundestag in 1983 was a major public statement rejecting Russian pressures.
And Mitterrand worked secretly with President Reagan in the Farewell Affair to shape a key effort to undercut the fruits of Russian efforts to steal technology from both the United States and Europe. Indeed, the Farwell Affairs is an often forgotten key nail in the coffin of the Soviet Union itself.
The Farewell dossier was the collection of documents that Colonel Vladimir Vetrov, a KGB defector (code-named “Farewell”), gathered and gave to the French DST in 1981–82, during the Cold War.
Vetrov was an engineer who had been assigned to evaluate information on Western hardware and software gathered by the “Line X” technical intelligence operation for Directorate T, the Soviet directorate for scientific and technical intelligence collection from the West. He became increasingly disillusioned with the Communist (Bolshevist) system and decided to work with the French at the end of 1980. Between the spring of 1981 and early 1982, Vetrov gave almost 4,000 secret documents to the DST, including the complete list of 250 Line X officers stationed under legal cover in embassies around the world.
As a consequence, Western nations undertook a mass expulsion of Soviet technology spies. The CIA also mounted a counter-intelligence operation that transferred modified hardware and software designs to the Soviets. Thomas Reed alleged this was the cause of a spectacular trans-Siberian pipeline disaster in 1982.
President Hollande, a leader of the same Party as President Mitterrand, might look back at these moments and reconsider. And when Mitterrand was President, France was not part of the integrated military command of NATO; now it is. And indeed holds the post for the NATO transformation commands.
It is not just about France, but the impact from continuing this technology transfer to a resurgent Russia can do to Europe itself.
Northern Europe is a key part of the New Europe, and clearly focused on both Baltic security and Arctic development, safety, security and defense. The Mistral ships will be used for both Baltic and Arctic missions by the Russians, as the Russians are focused on ice hardening the hulls of the Mistral.
The Russian Mistral is being optimized for Northern missions. Given the tensions within the Euro zone, setting in motion another set of tensions between those European states in the Euro zone and those who are not, is hardly a prescription for strengthening Europe’s role in the world, saying nothing of its impact on NATO.
One of the more amazing arguments being proffered by some against France doing anything about the Mistral deal is to argue that if one does not honor a deal France would lose credibility in the arms market.
Although interesting, this really misses the point.
Arms sales are not iron bound contracts which go to a state regardless of their behavior over the time receiving new arms.
If the state to which you are selling arms directly threatens you and your allies with what they are purchasing from you, one can clearly say no!
This is right up there with those who opposed Roosevelt from breaking the oil deals with the Empire of Japan, and the argument was made then that these were contracts which needed to be honored.
Only one small problem: the Empire of Japan was in the processing of swallowing Asia!
In 1966 the US Navy made a short movie about what was then called an “Attack Carrier.” The movie describes going to flight quarters and conducting combat air operations from an aircraft carrier off Vietnam. The political maneuvering by a President and Secretary of Defense who asked them to put their lives on the line was not discussed.
The US Navy when sent in harm’s way does whatever is asked to their last full measure, combat is their profession and loyalty to the Constitution not politics is their code.
“Ready on Arrival” highlights a simple truth evident today off Iraq that the direct lineage of the large deck aircraft carrier is an American point of pride. Engaging in combat almost fifty years ago and a modern carrier ready today personifies the fundamental point of the movie that the U.S. can with unexpected events put a Carrier on Station to support friends and confront enemies.
And so it goes fifty years later, off of Iraq.
An F/A-18E Super Hornet assigned to the “Tomcatters” of Strike Fighter Squadron (VFA) 31 launches from the aircraft carrier USS George H.W. Bush (CVN 77). June 16, 2014.
Perhaps the “to do what” is captured in an interview with a Naval Aviator who was a Marine General on the ground in Iraq.
On December 9th 2009 USMC Brigadier General Walsh, USNA ’79, a Naval Aviator, discussed his recent experiences in Iraq with the Second line of Defense.
In December 2008 BG Walsh became the Commanding General of the 2ndMarine Aircraft Wing Forward and deployed to Operation Iraqi Freedom on November 3rd. One of his previous assignments was serving an instructor at the U.S. Navy Fighter Weapons School (Top Gun) and he is a decorated Marine Corps Aviator.
His words are noteworthy today:
For the Commanding Officer, the challenge is simply the following: “How does aviation provide support in such a chaotic environment? Just as the guy on the ground is not certain of what is about to happen, so does the pilot trying to support those ground elements: all must deal with managing uncertainty.”
As the Iraqi leadership began to perform more functions, there was a remaining need to reassure the population that support could be provided throughout the country to the Iraqi allies. “For example, when the provincial government was to be seated in Al Anbar in June 2009, there was an Al Qaeda threat to Ramadi. The Governor asked us to fly our F-18s at 5000 feet to reassure the population and to deter any threats.”
“I was on the ground; we were stopped at a check point and the check point came under motor fire. Several vehicles in front of us were destroyed. All hell was breaking loose with mortars coming in every few seconds. We did not know where the things were coming from. We of course had no battery radar. We called in some F-18s and the minute the planes showed up the firing stopped; the enemy figured out that the F18s would know where they were with the obvious consequences. How do you measure this effect?”
Notice Generals Walsh’s direct combat experience and his comments on the effective use of F/A-18s.
The Hornet is same aircraft on station today that makes up the combat strike package of the Bush.
If the “to do what” turns to combat an opportunity will not have been squandered.
In preparing for combat strikes, one of the most important opportunities, if possible, is to make combat ready but non-kinetic “fam” for familiarization flights in the air over any potential ground targets.
Air dominance over Iraq allows Navy combat pilots the luxury of becoming very familiar in their view from the cockpit with the terrain, the movement of the enemy, the location of “friendlies” and potential targets that they might be asked to attack.
Consequently, it is critical that the more Bush F/A-18 pilots gain eyes on experience over potential targets the better is the chance to mitigate collateral damage. If in doing so they get the attention of ISIS forces, as General Walsh experience shows all the better.
I suspect Special Forces also appreciates hearing what is often called in characterizing US Military Jet noise–“the sound of freedom”
USN/USMC aviation forces understand deeply their direct human responsibility when the pickle button or trigger is pulled–it is to first do no harm in accurately taking out some very bad people-that dimension of pilot in the cockpit CBG capability is critical and not well understood by non-aviators.
Ed Timperlake is a Carrier Qualified Naval Aviator who was CO of VMFA-321 a Marine Reserve Fighter Squadron and is a graduate of the 1969 class of the US Naval Academy.
See also:
For an opportunity to comment on this article, see the following:
The crisis in Iraq is the latest chapter in the post-Arab spring narrative.
But Iraq is not an-itself crisis but part of a wider context starting with Benghazi, to Egypt, to Syria, to Iran and back again.
Actions across any one part of the region reverberate throughout the region and shape the way ahead for any Western power.
The US has unique military power available for use in the region.
It also has an historical legacy: a significant Iraq engagement recently concluded with a number of on the ground participants with the US in shaping the post-US occupation.
The US is not simply an historical bystander.
And the ongoing engagement in Afghanistan is itself affected by lessons learned from Iraq by those working for and against US interests in Afghanistan.
A significant Inside the Beltway debate and effort to shape a realistic post-Arab Spring policy is clearly needed.
This would be true even if the Russian leader had not clearly demonstrated that the assumption that Russia would acquiesce in the Western led and shaped post-Soviet order is clearly no longer valid. The European security order, and that of the Mediterranean and the Middle East is clearly now a work in progress, with Putin busily engaged to reshape the situation to reflect what he perceives to be the proper role of Russia in the region.
Beyond the policy debate, a critical consideration is to avoid simply debating with ourselves.
It is crucial to focus as well on how adversaries view the likely actions of President Obama and his Administration with regard to the use of military power in supporting US objectives in Europe and the Middle East.
President Obama has worked hard to differentiate his views and the role of his Administration from past ones. He has succeeded. The world understands that he approaches the use of military power differently from the past, and adversaries and allies alike are reaching their judgments about what this means for them.
A clear research agenda for the policy community in the United States is to do a realistic assessment on ourselves: what conclusions are being reached by allies and adversaries alike about how the US will use military power affect my policies and interests?
One answer is to look at the President’s evident sweet spot with regard to military power. The President has prioritized counter-terrorism as the number one issue facing the US with regard to usable military power and his preferred means is a new strategic triad: the use of NSA-led intelligence gathering, the use of drones and selective use of Special Forces.
The President tends to view military power as a means of law enforcement.
Putin has mocked the President with regard to Ukraine and in so doing revealed his judgment about the current US approach.
In a late May characterization of US policy and its limits, Putin made this comment:
Who is he to judge, Putin told CNBC during an interview this morning.
‘Who is he to judge, seriously?’ he repeated, according to a translator. ‘If he wants to judge people, why doesn’t he get a job in court somewhere?
There is a clear means-ends issue.
If the preferred pattern is the use of NSA-Drones-Special Forces, then those means define the ends. One looks to apply the formula broadly, whether or not strategic ends will be met by such an approach.
The new strategic triad is rooted in a belief that “boots on the ground” and “airpower” are not only different things but steps in a ladder of escalation. For example, the options which the USN-USMC team can put on the table rapidly to insert and withdraw force – boots and airpower simultaneously – is not relevant unless there is a military relevant law enforcement activity in prospect.
The triad can be deployed and removed easily it is believed, although the footprint necessary to do intelligence and use drones tends to be overlooked.
Notably, the parallels between Iraq and Afghanistan are not in play, and considering how the friends and deadly enemies of Americans in Afghanistan are drawing conclusions about US behavior AFTER the US has withdrawn.
The Iraq crisis is the first test of the Obama West Point doctrine, and the President’s words clearly inform adversary and allied perceptions as well.
If one looks at those words, it is clear how limited military power is in the President’s panoply of power tools.
Indeed, the President counterpoises diplomacy with military action, a virtual dichotomy that Putin has clearly recognized before the speech and has acted upon.
The overall tone of the speech is that the US is a unique world leader. There is no recognition in the speech that he is direct confrontation with a leader he sees his task as gaining global fear and respect to return Russia to its place in the world, or the clear intent of the PRC leaders to expand their power in Asia and beyond.
Yet these are not bumps along the road but key challenges directly facing the US, the West and our Asian allies.
The President clearly puts military power in its place:
“Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail.”
The President highlights the transition from having too many hammers to what he views as the proper approach:
Four and a half years later, as you graduate, the landscape has changed.
We have removed our troops from Iraq.
We are winding down our war in Afghanistan. Al-Qaida’s leadership on the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan has been decimated, and Osama bin Laden is no more.
And through it all, we’ve refocused our investments in what has always been a key source of American strength: a growing economy that can provide opportunity for everybody who’s willing to work hard and take responsibility here at home.
What is the residual role of the US military?
The good news is that there are no direct military threats – no mention of nuclear threats – to the US; there are only indirect threats to the US via allies and partners and only lingering law enforcement threats writ large threats from terrorism.
Our military has no peer.
The odds of a direct threat against us by any nation are low, and do not come close to the dangers we faced during the Cold War.
Russian and Chinese challenges are put in the category of the indirect threats via our alliance basket.
Russia’s aggression towards former Soviet states unnerves capitals in Europe while China’s economic rise and military reach worries its neighbors.
And the role of US military power in supporting US global interests?
But to say that we have an interest in pursuing peace and freedom beyond our borders is not to say that every problem has a military solution.
Since World War II, some of our most costly mistakes came not from our restraint but from our willingness to rush into military adventures without thinking through the consequences, without building international support and legitimacy for our action, without leveling with the American people about the sacrifices required.
Tough talk often draws headlines, but war rarely conforms to slogans…..
I was worried about critics who think military intervention is the only way for America to avoid looking weak.
And lest one misses the point about the reluctance to use military power other than the triad:
Because the costs associated with military action are so high, you should expect every civilian leader — and especially your commander in chief — to be clear about how that awesome power should be used.
And what is the strategic rationale for the new strategic triad?
I believe we must shift our counter terrorism strategy, drawing on the successes and shortcomings of our experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, to more effectively partner with countries where terrorist networks seek a foothold.
And the need for a new strategy reflects the fact that today’s principal threat no longer comes from a centralized al-Qaida leadership.
Instead it comes from decentralized al-Qaida affiliates and extremists, many with agendas focused in the countries where they operate.
And this lessens the possibility of large-scale 9/11-style attacks against the homeland, but it heightens the danger of U.S. personnel overseas being attacked, as we saw in Benghazi.
It heightens the danger to less defensible targets, as we saw in a shopping mall in Nairobi. So we have to develop a strategy that matches this diffuse threat, one that expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin or stir up local resentments.
The President is meeting his objectives stated in 2008:
“I don’t want to just end the war, but I want to end the mind-set that got us into war in the first place.”
But while he is changing the American mindset, the world is a tougher place.
The words of his West Point speech were barely dry when Iraq broke and the crisis in Ukraine deepened.
How will the new triad work to deal with these situations?
Or is Putin reading the President correctly that Russia can recover its place in the sun while Europe deals with its Euro crisis and President Obama puzzles over which nails and hammers might be used if necessary?
For those who would like to comment on this article please go to the following:
2014-06-21 In a recent presentation at the Air Force Association, Col. Michael Orr, the CO of VMX-22, provided a look at how the USMC is shaping its combat cloud approach for the MAGTF.
At the heart of the approach is working the following challenge:
“We are working to push increased situational awareness, big picture CAOC-type information, down to individual warfighters using secure tablets in tactical aircraft en route to an objective area.”
Based on his recent experiences in working with the Infantry Officer’s Course and with Marine Aviation Weapons and Tactics Squadron or MAWTS-1, Col. Orr discussed the USMC approach to shaping what might be called the combat cloud for the air-ground team.
Col. Orr underscored that for the USMC digital interoperability was about empowering warfighters. He argued that the experience of pilots in having significant connectivity and situational awareness was not the same as what the ground combat element or GCE in the USMC was experiencing.
He described this as a split between the haves and the have-nots.
In the air combat world, pilots and air controllers have seen significant gains in connectivity and situational awareness. For many of the ground combat element, they were operating in virtually Vietnam era conditions with radio communication as the only link.
Operating a tiltrotor-enabled assault force with combat cloud-enabled ground warriors is an unfair advantage much like Indiana Jones using a gun to deal with a threat from a sword.
The Marines have been changing dramatically key aspects of how they insert force, notably around the Osprey.
With a rotorcraft, the ground forces and commanders get on the helo and arrive within the hour at the objective area. In an air-refuelable Osprey, the ground forces and commander might spend several hours in the back before reaching the objective area; and obviously, not being informed and able to do mission planning in route is unacceptable.
Whatever gains one might get with speed and range will be lost without enhanced C2 and ISR enabling the GCE in flight to the objective area.
Our passion right now is taking all of the information from airborne and off-board sensors and pushing that tactical information to a warfighter in the back of the Osprey.
It could be an air mission commander or a ground force assault commander.
We need to provide that sensor-based information to the decision maker so they can make smart and intelligent decisions en route.
With regard to the AFA discussion, Orr underscored:
Our effort very akin to the broader USAF combat cloud discussion, only we bring it down to a much smaller taskforce level.
And at that level, we are focused on a specific objective, but it’s one that’s scalable up to a larger environment.
The cacophony of wave forms and proprietary solutions is simply out of sync with where the USMC is going with its new aviation assets and working relationships with the GCE in shaping the 21st century MAGTF.
We’re moving towards a software programmable payload solution that enables a software programmable radio to take sensor inputs in and then put the inputs out in a variety of waveforms.
And this is really where we are headed.
Currently, the Marines are experimenting with various gateway solutions to empower the GCE working with Marine air to provide for more effective combat solutions.
One item, which has been tested, is the remote control of UAV payloads from ground or airborne situations.
We’ve executed remote control of payloads from the back of the V-22.
We have also done it from a ground based cyber and electronic warfare coordination center.
Col. Orr also discussed the USMC effort to merge the complementary capabilities of two traditionally separate, very separate communities.
We have signals intelligence professionals, primarily ground-based radio battalions who report back up through Title 50 authorities.
And then we have a separate group that does electronic warfare, notably the EA-6B Prowler conducting tactical electronic warfare.
Those two communities traditionally haven’t really talked much.
We are bringing them together in the same facility called the Cyber/Electronic Warfare Coordination Cell (CEWCC).
That Cyber/Electronic Warfare Coordination Cell provides the MAGTF commander the ability to deconflict and conduct operations within the electromagnetic spectrum at a tactical level.
At tactical level, the CEWCC allows us to be able to combine cyber and electronic warfare effects and have the commander make decisions ranging from listening to deception to jamming.
Finally, he discussed the importance of using tablet-sized software to get information into a usable package for the ground warriors.
“The tablet format allows the user to define what they want to see, not a higher headquarters to decide what you need to see, but to allow the individual operator to pull down that information and scale it to your desired level of detail.”
Col. Orr closed his presentation by posing a challenge:
“How do we provide the end user with the right information and provide them the right flexibility to see what they need and what they care about, and do so in the right security framework environment that properly protects the information?”
For further pieces on USMC innovation with regard to tiltrotar-enabled operations for long-range force insertion see the following:
The head of United Nations peace-keeping operations Herve Ladsous says the organization will soon deploy unarmed Medium Altitude Long Endurance (MALE) surveillance drones to help the peacekeeping mission in Mali.
Ladsous revealed the details of the surveillance program in a briefing to the UN Security Council on Wednesday: “I take this opportunity to signal to the (Security) Council our intention to deploy unmanned aerial systems in order to enhance the situational awareness of MINUSMA as well as its ability to protect civilians and its own personnel,” he said.
He did not specific the type, numbers and possible deployment date for the UAVs being sought for operations.
Falco UAV already used by the UN in in the DRC. Credit: defenceWeb
A pre-solicitation notice seeking contractors for the Mali UAV program posted on the UN Procurement Division website on April 28 revealed that ‘multiple’ drones will be operated from bases in Gao and Timbuktu.
“The UN-PD is seeking Expressions of Interest (EOI) for the provision of Unmanned Aerial Systems (UASs) with multiple Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) in support of peace-keeping operations in Mali with the basing of one system at Timbuktu and (the other in) Gao. The UAS provider will be an independent contractor who remains in control of the system and aircraft and shall be responsible for operation and maintenance of the aircraft.
“The flight operating crew and all maintenance personnel shall at all times remain the servant or agent of the contractor. All staff and equipment necessary for the operation of the aircraft are expected to be self-sufficient for all technical and subsistence requirements, although in some locations, accommodation and meals may be provided within UN compound for security of personnel or lack of alternative. The staff of the independent contractor will operate closely with UN aviation and military personnel and interact with the host nation as and when required,” the solicitation reads.
Further, the contractor will be required to provide staff to track, control, monitor the UAS and provide analysis of data received working closely with UN mission contacts. The required UAVs must have an endurance of 12-18 hours and be able to operate at an altitude of 10 000 feet while sending back real-time camera/infrared video and synthetic aperture radar imagery via line-of-sight communications.
“While the initial deployment of UAS is expected to be based on a particular UN Mission, future deployment could be in any peacekeeping mission. It is expected that contracts will be for a period of 3 years, extendable at the option of the UN to 4 and 5 years and will generally apply to a single mission area. UAV capability should provide long endurance and be able to fly long range missions to a point of interest, loiter on patrol and return to base,” the notice stated.
The deployment of UAVs to Malian operations follows their success in support of the military operations of the UN peacekeeping force in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC).
Selex ES Falco UAVs have been deployed there.
Ladsous has already indicated that he would like to deploy UAVs in support of other African peacekeeping missions in Darfur, the Central African Republic (CAR) and South Sudan.
Malian Foreign Minister Abdoulaye Diop said his government has already approved the UN operation of unarmed drones and hopes they will be deployed as soon as possible. The government is grappling with a national security crisis in which the weak army is battling a resurgent Tuareg separatist rebellion and a host of armed Islamist groups with links to Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb.
The security situation has deteriorated remarkably in the past few months, leading to increased armed attacks and massacres of civilians inside and outside refugee camps, foreign aid workers and UN personnel. In a report analysing the performance of the five Selex UAVs which were deployed to the eastern DRC in December last year, UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon said the drones have proved useful.
“Since their operationalization, the unmanned aerial systems have provided MONUSCO with a responsive, controlled, and timely source of information, particularly in terms of supplementing the force’s intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance efforts against the illegal activities of armed groups,” he said.
Republished with permission of our strategic partner defencWeb:
