By James Durso

The U.S. and its main Persian Gulf partners, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), have had a falling out in recent days.

The causes are both immediate and long-term and each party feels the blame lies with those ingrates on the other side.

Recently, the kingdom and the UAE refused to pump more oil to make up for the loss of Russian oil in the market in the wake of the war in Ukraine, and help to reduce the price at the pump in the U.S.

Both countries signaled their support for OPEC+, which counts Russia as a member, and the UAE oil minister explained, “We need their [U.S.] understanding that what we’re doing is to the benefit of the consumers, to the benefit of the United States and to the benefit of the consumers worldwide.”

In addition, the UAE abstained from a UN Security Council (UNSC) vote condemning the Russian attack on Ukraine, reportedly in frustration over U.S. the response to attacks by Houthi rebels on the emirate, though it later voted for a UN General Assembly motion condemning the attack.

Saudi Arabia’s de facto leader Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) avoided U.S. president Joe Biden by being a no-show at the G20 meeting in March, and not being on the line during Biden’s recent phone call with Saudi King Salman.

But MBS did manage to pick up the receiver to talk to Russian president Vladimir Putin, and the kingdom invited China’s leader Xi Jinping to visit the kingdom this Spring. (UAE leader Mohammed bin Zayed (MBZ) also ghosted Biden when the White House wanted to discuss the oil crisis.) MBS shrugged off Biden’s negative opinion of him with, “Simply, I do not care.”

During his visit to Riyadh, Xi will be sure to advocate that the kingdom should accept Chinese yuan for oil sales in a move to minimize China’s exposure to the U.S. financial sector and increase its financial leverage.

This has been talked about for a long time, but the time may finally be right as thinking about the end of the dollar’s dominance no longer seems far-fetched.

If the Saudis agree and lock in a long-term forward contract, Xi would return to Beijing in triumph before the 20th Party Congress, where he expects to be named to a third term as China’s paramount leader, his position made unassailable with the yuan enshrined as a petro currency, and the position of the US Dollar weakened.

Now, who wouldn’t want that IOU in his pocket?

Both sides should consider practical steps to get the relationship on a better footing, but what should Washington consider if it moves to do so?

First, how you treat your friends is more important than how you treat your enemies.

MBS and MBZ likely absorbed the appropriate lessons when the U.S. quickly dropped longtime U.S. client Hosni Mubarak after two weeks of protests. Washington then supported a UNSC resolution it then used as justification to attack Libya, causing the capture and death of the leader Muammar al-Qaddafi, the destruction of the country, and an unprecedented refugee crisis in Africa and Europe. In 2016, when some guy named Biden worked in the White House, then-president Barack Obama supported efforts to oust Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

More recently, the U.S. limited arms sales to Saudi Arabia to “defensive” weapons only, in an attempt to curb the kingdom’s fight against the Iranian-sponsored Houthi militia. Then the Biden administration reversed the Trump administration designation of the Houthis as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, which may have encouraged the movement to increase attacks on the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. sale of the F-35 fighter to the UAE has been delayed over U.S. concerns about the surveillance ability of China’s 5G wireless network located near UAE airfields, and the U.S. desire for operational restrictions, which the emirate understands to mean it can use the aircraft to support U.S. foreign policy, but not its independent moves.

Recently, the UAE, after a U.S. demand, terminated a Chinese-funded $1 billion project in the Khalifa Port Free Trade Zone the U.S. said had military applications. U.S. President Joe Biden spoke about the project to Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Zayed who said he heard Biden “loud and clear,” though the emirate later declared, “our position remains the same, that the facilities were not military facilities.”

This must seem like Groundhog Day for the UAE.

In 2006, Dubai-owned DP World was forced to back out of an approved purchase of port management contracts at six major U.S. seaports after the U.S. Congress opposed the deal. Sixteen years later the UAE is learning it can’t even conclude a seaport project at home without a U.S. intervention.

As a result of the U.S. arm twisting, the UAE may have to make an offsetting accommodation to China, its top trade partner, that the U.S. will like even less, a prime example of “it seemed like a good idea at the time.”

The UAE and Saudi Arabia have no doubt noted that Israel, America’s top ally in the region, also came in for its share of abuse by Washington, so at least there’s misery in company.

In January, as the Russian troop buildup on Ukraine’s border continued, the U.S. withdrew its support for the EastMed natural gas pipeline from Israel to Greece. In 2020, Washington pushed Israel to stop Chinese investments in large infrastructure projects, most recently the new Haifa Port, the largest container port in Israel.

And the U.S. administration appears heedless of Iran’s declaration that Israel is “doomed to disappear.”  Or maybe it just doesn’t care.

Most distressing for the U.S. friends in the Gulf, is Washington’s mad dash to revive the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which was originally negotiated without any role for Iran’s neighbors, who will be most immediately threated by an unconstrained Tehran. The JCPOA negotiating team did include far-away Germany, likely as a sop to Europe, though, ironically, Germany was a source of much of the nuclear technology on Iran’s clandestine shopping list.

And recently, the crown princes (and the world) witnessed America’s livestreamed retreat in Afghanistan, as it blithely abandoned two decades of effort, $2 trillion dollars, and several thousand of its Afghan helpers and U.S. citizens to the mercies of the Taliban.

That was likely a clarifying moment for the princes who now knew that all that shona ba shona (“shoulder to shoulder”) stuff in Kabul was just talk, and they would be wise to diversify their portfolios.

Next, insult diplomacy doesn’t work.

Joe Biden famously called Saudi Arabia a “pariah” with “very little social [sic] redeeming value” for the killing of activist Jamal Khashoggi, and which should make for some awkward moments if Biden ever has to visit the kingdom.

Now, MBS no doubt commissioned Khashoggi’s killing, but he’s famously thin-skinned and is on the cusp of a multi-decade run as the leader of Saudi Arabia.

And the U.S. has no ability to influence succession planning in the kingdom, which was plain when Washington’s favorite, then-crown prince Muhammad bin Nayef, was ousted.

(Pro tip: a political figure who’s the public favorite of foreign security services doesn’t stand a chance.)

Biden’s predecessor, Donald Trump, got much better results as he wasn’t averse to transactional diplomacy and he understood that do deal with a crown prince, he had to send his own crown prince, Jared Kushner, someone with walk-in privileges at the Oval Office.

He managed to get the UAE to sign on to the Abraham Accords, which probably required Saudi assent. Trump also appealed to the Saudis to reverse a planned oil export increase – which they did, even though it aided the U.S. oil and gas industry.

President Ronald Reagan likewise got the Saudis to act in America’s interest when he urged them to help defeat the Communists by depressing the price of oil, slashing the Soviet Union’s revenues and accelerating the collapse of the USSR. Both presidents understood that dealing with the royals required a personal touch or the opportunity to be the preferred partner in an epochal undertaking, i.e., destroying Godless Communism.

Today, MBS knows he can outlast the outbursts from the older man whose health challenges are increasingly obvious, though Biden’s deteriorating health poses some risk to the kingdom.

America’s manic pursuit of a new nuclear deal with Iran will leave Saudi Arabia and the UAE exposed to Iran’s export of revolution in pursuit of regional hegemony.

Bolstered by access to embargoed overseas cash, and the de-listing of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, Iran’s moves will cause these friends to hedge by increasing trade and cooperation with China, Russia, and India, and not cooperating with U.S. policies when they have no stake in the outcome, i.e., Russia vs Ukraine.

Biden’s policy is seen as a continuation of Obama’s intent that Saudi Arabia needs to “share” the region with Iran, an Iran that has declared, “there will be no trace of Al Saud in Saudi Arabia by 2030.”

In late 2021, news reports indicated Saudi Arabia is building, with China’s help, solid-fuel ballistic missiles. Though the effort pre-dates the Biden administration, the state of the kingdom’s relations with the U.S. may encourage Riyadh to consider development of non-conventional warheads.

Not surprisingly, Saudi observers see the U.S. pursuit of Iran as the end of the relationship.

Mohammed al-Yahya, the former al-Arabiya editor-in-chief, declared, “When Barack Obama negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran, we Saudis understood him to be seeking the breakup of a 70-year marriage…Why should America’s regional allies help Washington contain Russia in Europe when Washington is strengthening Russia and Iran in the Middle East?”

And while the Saudis fret, Dubai is welcoming Russians (and their flight cash) and may have soon have to grapple with the “problems” of an overheated luxury property market and a shortage of Russian-speaking salesmen at luxury car dealerships.

Diversifying the portfolio is more than ignoring U.S. requests to pump more oil, pricing oil in yuan, and welcoming Russians.

It’s also about exercising autonomy by, say, hosting Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad in the UAE, much to Washington’s ire, which will also give Moscow a foreign policy win in its support for Damascus, a diplomatic partner of Moscow since 1944 (Moscow was the first foreign capital to establish diplomatic relations with Riyadh – in 1926 – though the relationship included a 54-year break.) The Emirati view: “Our new approach emphasizes diplomacy, de-escalation and engagement … and we put our own interests first.”

But can we still be friends?

As it looks to the multi-polar future, Washington should consider that its securitization of the relationships in the Gulf has created the expectation in the Gulf countries, who have relied on the U.S. for 45% of their arms imports in recent years, that all that cash was buying a security guarantee.

The U.S., which was too busy counting the money, may not have understood the expectation it created so, when it turned its back on Afghanistan, made concession after concession to woo Tehran, and demanded the Gulf states fall in line with its anti-Russia policy, the loss of confidence was serious and Russia, China, and India may be more reliable partners for the long haul.

James Durso (@james_durso) is a regular commentator on foreign policy and national security matters. Mr. Durso served in the U.S. Navy for 20 years and has worked in Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.

Featured Photo: Photo 6304947 © Benjamin Vess | Dreamstime.com

By Edward Timperlake, US Naval Academy, Class of 1969

“Trustworthy AI” was the research topic which was the focus of the presentation by Dr. Jeannette Wing, at the 2022 Michelson Lecture.

She is Executive Vice President for Research at Columbia University. Formerly, she was Corporate Vice President of Research at Microsoft Corporation.

Dr. Wing presented her research focusing on the trustworthiness of artificial intelligence (AI). She discussed the recent growth in deployment of AI systems in critical domains that directly impact human lives and focused on the increasing concerns about whether AI decisions can be trusted to be correct, reliable, fair and safe, especially under adversarial attack.

The evening program announcing the lecture, highlighted the approach:

Recent years have seen an astounding growth in deployment of AI systems in critical domains such as autonomous vehicles, criminal justice, healthcare, hiring, housing, human resource management, law enforcement, and public safety, where decisions taken by AI agents directly impact human lives.

Consequently, there is an increasing concern if these decisions can be trusted to be correct, reliable, fair, and safe, especially under adversarial attacks. 

How then can we deliver on the promise of the benefits of AI but address these scenarios that have life-critical consequences for people and society?  In short, how can we achieve trustworthy AI?

Her talk posed a new research agenda, from a formal-methods perspective, to foster increased trust in AI systems. By so doing, Dr Wing demonstrated both her brilliance and humility, in that she presented her research as essentially a very important open ended “work in progress.” In doing so, she recognized that the Midshipman present will continue building from her foundational mathematical work.

Dr. Wing framed the current challenge for the United States Navy inside the ever advancing information revolution in order to fight and win any combat engagement. She underscored that “Computer science is not computer programming. Thinking like a computer scientist means more than being able to program a computer. It requires thinking at multiple levels of abstraction.”

The Michelson lectures are named in honor of Albert A. Michelson. The Class of 1969, USNA President Steve Comiskey reminded the audience that Albert A. Michelson, began as a Midshipman with USNA Class of 1873, then returned to the Academy as an instructor and became the first American to receive a 1907 Nobel Prize in Physics.

In Newtonian mechanics, quantities such as speed and distance may be transformed from one frame of reference to another, provided that the frames are in uniform motion (i.e. not accelerating). Considering the results of the Michelson-Morley experiment led Einstein to develop the theory of special relativity.

It should be noted that the famous Michelson-Morley measurement of the speed of light took place on the Yard at Annapolis and was as stated a seminal Physics building block for Professor Einstein’s Theories of Relativity. Consequently, his work ultimately empowered President Truman’s wartime leadership to employ the two Atomic weapons that ended the war with Japan. It also became the dawn of nuclear deterrence existing to this day.

However, tragically it was also not lost on those present in this early spring day that for the first time since WW II a vicious war has broken out in Europe. The outcome of Russia vs. Ukraine is yet to be determined. And this war highlights that the danger for strategic miscalculation is significant for the nation and our allies. It should be remembered how important the Navy’s tactical and strategic role was in abating the Cuban Missile crisis which also had the potential to spin out of control between at the time, the Soviet Union and the United States.

Taking the world as it is on defending America now and in the future, the 2022 Michelson Lecture personifies a mix of what makes the U.S. Navy the most advanced fighting force at sea in the world. It is an ability to combine cutting edge technologies with competent combat experience and leadership.

Dr. Wing’s talk brings into focus the most important question on the value and accuracy of information in a fast moving combat environment. Adding the power of AI must be filtered through a win or lose speed of light function of command and control which is simply stated: Is the information presented accurate, timely and useful?

Concurrently, with Dr Wing’s research, four Navy officers, two currently serving and two who just relinquished command are perfect examples of combat officers achieving very influential roles, and  in a very significant  way contributed to today’s fighting Navy, and all are Academy grads.

Former “Supe” Vice Admiral Ted Carter, (ret)  and Rear Admiral Mike Manazir (ret) former N9, along with current “Supe” Vice Admiral Sean Buck and  USN Captain Ben Shupp Dean of the Academy’s Math and Science Department, all bridge the practical with the possible. And the Brigade of Midshipman who are the future are the reason the Michelson Lecture series was generated and continues.

Right now with a hot war in Europe, two Russian military announcements highlight why the fighting Navy has to be ever ready while developing useful war fighting combat systems and con-ops to fight and win around the globe against any adversary:

In a March 14 2019 article, I asked a very direct question; is President Putin diabolically smart or simply a psychopath?  Perhaps he is both, because by his direct action, the world is now a much more dangerous place as the former KGB officer creates a nuclear doomsday scenario backed by real Russian naval capabilities: Russia is said to have built a new 100-megaton underwater nuclear doomsday device, and it has threatened the USwith it and the device goes beyond traditional ideas of nuclear war fighting and poses a direct threat to the future of humanity or life on Earth.

Then in less than a week before the Michelson Lecture Russian military forces announced they fired a hypersonic sub-atmospheric missile against a target in Ukraine.

Both are strategic threats, essentially a stealth fired nuclear armed torpedo, no launch plume  seen by satellite sensors,  and a hypersonic nuclear armed missile are  right now, today, deadly serious strategic game changing weapons.

Fortunately, the U.S. Navy leadership team of the four officers presented above understood  from the time they graduated into the Fleet why the USNA motto is so important; “”Ex Scientia Tridens,” “From Knowledge, Sea power.”

Back-to-back Superintendents highlight how this works for the U.S. Navy. Vice-Admiral Ted Carpenter was an F-14 combat radar intercept officer and Vice-Admiral Sean Buck was a former aviation crew member of the Navy patrol reconnaissance community and both are perfect examples of right person at the right time along with the Dean of the Mathematics and Science Department Captain Ben Shupp who earlier in his career, commanded the Gold Crew of the USS West Virginia

Three candid pictures exemplify why having Fleet combat experience and then return to guide the next generation of Naval Officers is so important. Lt. Manazir’s call sign  “Nasty” and Ted “Slapshot” Carter were honored by having their name painted on the F-14 displayed in the Yard.

Naval Academy F-14 ;Naval Academy Superintendent Vice Admiral Walter E. “Ted” Carter Jr logged many flight hours in this jet in the late 1980’s. His pilot was Mike Manazir.

A candid photo of the Current Superintendent of  USNA Vice Admiral Sean Buck, present at Maritime Patrol and Reconnaissance  Group 4.

Then  Cdr Shupp’s Change of Command  for SSBN 736 Gold Crew  yelled one last “Hoo-yah, West Virginia,” a sort-of battle cry that has become popular onboard to which the crew replied back, “Go Mountaineers”

Fighting at the speed of light with information flowing accurately inside a dynamic payload utility function for targets acquisition and then successful target engagement connected to the appropriate payload is the key to solving how to defend against evolving strategic weapons.

A nuclear warhead end of life torpedoes is a very significant ASW challenged and both types of hyper-Sonic missiles from a sub-atmosphere shot to the complexities of IRBM/ICBM missiles with re-entry atmospheric hypersonic glide characteristics are deadly challenges.

As an F-14  RIO Lt “Slapshot” Carter  had to direct and engage multiple bogies using then current  state of the art radar and sensors to direct a missile payload appropriate to kill, while flying faster than the speed of sound.

The Pilot’s name on the F-14 at Annapolis  is Mike Manazir “Nasty” who finished his Naval career as DCNO Warfare Systems (N9.) says it all also.

DCNO Warfare Systems (N9) determines, validates and integrates requirements and resources for manpower, training, sustainment, safety, modernization, and procurement of the Navy’s air, surface, undersea and expeditionary warfare systems (manned and unmanned).

As the resource sponsor, N9 establishes requirements, sets priorities, and oversees overall planning and programming for such domains as expeditionary warfare, surface warfare, undersea warfare, air warfare, and unmanned warfighting systems. This includes associated manpower, support, training and readiness

Thus the lesson learned from the names painted on the Tomcat fuselage personifies the ever increasing combat readiness of Navy tacair. From the F-14 to eventual Midshipman in the audience some soon to fly the F-35, each generation is tasked to bring  world class combat aviation to the fight.

Superintendent Carter should also be acknowledged as father of the Naval Academy state-of-the art “Cyber” academic discipline. Cyber is emerging as one of the key domains of warfare, which a modern sea service must master to be successful in a wide spectrum of operations. Modern warships and systems already deployed with the USN and USMC as well as those coming on line all rely on digital content, communications moving at the speed of light to empower effective C2 capabilities to ensure mission success.

The current Superintendent flew in the anti-submarine and maritime patrol P-3.community. That community is essential for defending both the Fleet and United States.

With the transition to the P-8 and Triton, the Navy is shaping a common culture guiding the transformation of the ASW and ISR side of Naval Air. The acquisition term for the effort is a 21^st Century  “family of systems” whereby the P-3 is being “replaced” by the P-8 and the Triton Remotely Piloted Aircraft.

Clearly the combined capability is a replacement of the P-3 in only one sense – executing the anti-submarine warfare function. But the additional ISR and C2 enterprise being put in place to operate the combined P-8 and Triton capability is a much broader capability than the classic P-3.

The P-8/Triton capability is part of 21^st century air combat systems: software upgradeable, soon empowered by AI, fleet deployed,  with a multinational coalition emerging peer partnership.

Software upgradeability can eventually included AI computational systems and will provide for a lifetime of combat learning to be reflected in the rewriting of the software code while adding new capabilities over the operational life of the aircraft.

Hence the essential challenge has been perfectly captured by Dr.Wing with her  focus on the trustworthiness of AI.

Over time, fleet knowledge will allow the U.S. Navy and its partners to understand how best to maintain, support and dynamically grow the aircraft combat systems while operating in support of global operations.

On Wednesday March 16 2022, Dr. Jeannette Wing of Columbia University, speaking in the theater of Mahan Hall, challenged Midshipman to focus on advancing the development of trustworthy AI.

It is just another step forward for her world class university which is fostering intellectual growth into the future. It is noteworthy that Columbia University has a long history of creating scientific breakthroughs including the first nuclear fission reaction in the Americas, hence “The Manhattan Project.”

The United States Naval Academy, has had two back to back College “Presidents.” called Superintendents who were selected for their successfully flying many, many missions in the U.S. Navy offensive/defensive combat enterprise.

While national rankings of Colleges ebb and flow, in 2017 the U.S. Naval Academy was ranked the No. 1 public school among national liberal arts colleges, according to the annual U.S. News & World Report, Best Colleges.

It is fitting for American  national security to celebrate the great motto of the USN ‘Boomer” USS West Virginia SSBN-736,  skippered by Commander Shupp who is now in charge of Math and Science at Navy. The West Virginia’s motto represents  but one state but can easily personify  the quest for eternal freedom for all citizens of the United States: Montani Semper Liberi   —“Mountaineers are Always Free”.

All enemies of America who wish us harm should never forget that all our combat forces are an ever improving work in progress.

By Australian Defence Business Review

Defence Minister Peter Dutton has formally launched the Australian Defence Force’s Defence Space Command.

Speaking at the 2022 Air and Space Conference in Canberra on 22 March, Minister Dutton signalled the commencement of operations for the new Defence Space Command after it was announced in 2021, and AVM Cath Roberts was appointed to lead it in January 2022. The new command will draw personnel from the three armed services, from Defence public servants and industry contractors, and the Australian Space Agency (ASA).

Whilst he acknowledged it as “modest” compared to similar commands being established in the US and other countries, he described it as a “necessary endeavour with a view to protecting our national interests and our need for a Space Force in the future”.

“Together with like-minded partners and the United Nations, Australia has long championed the responsible and peaceful use of outer space in accordance with international norms,” he said. “But space is becoming more congested and is already contested – particularly as the boundaries between competition and conflict become increasingly blurred through grey-zone activities.

“While space is primarily a civil domain — to support navigation, communication networks, financial systems, scientific enterprises, weather forecasting, and disaster response — it will undoubtedly become a domain which takes on greater military significance in the 21st century,” he added. “A domain which is now an operational theatre which provides space-based communication, intelligence, and navigation to the joint force.

“Importantly, Defence Space Command is Australia’s contribution towards a larger, collective effort among like-minded countries to ensure a safe, stable, and secure space domain. By developing our sovereign space capabilities, we will not only become more self-reliant, but also be a better ally and partner through the combined effects of our capabilities.

“Australia’s aim will be to invest in new military space capabilities to counter threats…To assure our continued access to space-based intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance and to uphold the free use of space.”

Minister Dutton also launched Australia’s Defence Space Strategy which he says will guide the efforts and priorities of Defence Space Command.

“Importantly, Australia and the United States are strengthening our Alliance to support our mutual objectives in the space domain,” he said. “The Australian Department of Defence and the US National Reconnaissance Office have committed to a broad range of cooperative satellite activities which will expand Australia’s space knowledge and capabilities.

“Our partnership will also contribute to the US National Reconnaissance Office’s pursuit of a more capable, integrated, and resilient space architecture to support global coverage in a wide range of intelligence mission requirements.

On the sidelines of the Air and Space Conference, AVM Roberts told media that her organisation initially comprises 105 personnel, and would be located at Fairbairn in Canberra with smaller presences at Air Command near Sydney, Hobart, and co-located with the ASA in Adelaide.

“Our mission is to assure Australia’s access to space,” she said. “We really need to make sure that Australia’s reliance on services from space are protected, not just the military elements.”

AVM Roberts said they needed to be able to deliver and contribute space capability much faster than was planned in the Defence Integrated Investment Plan.

“I am doing a complete architecture review. It has been under way for a short time,” she said. “That work is really really important and I expect you will see modifications. We are going to do things really quickly. I have some really good ideas about how we can deliver capability far more quickly than we have in the past.”

AVM Roberts said she had tasked her officers to get some capability within the next four months. “We have a bunch of space domain awareness (SDA) companies in Australia who can provide us with data as a service,” she said. “We are going to do a bunch of minor projects to actually be able to feed information into the SDA picture and we will be able to share that information not only with our allies in the US but also with any country in the region.”

“We are also testing a mission system to pull that data together,” she added. “It is really important that we start contributing. We have a couple of little satellites up there but SDA is where we can start and we need to operationalise it because we are so far behind.”

Asked if there was a prospect the Joint Project 9102 sovereign defence satellite communications could deliver capability sooner than planned, she said, “If I have something to do with it yes. 9102 followed the traditional approach and the tenders will be evaluated. That will result in a capability being fielded a long time away.

“We need those satellites in geostationary orbit,” she added. “There is no doubt about that. How quickly can we do it? That is something we will talk about with the companies once we have selected a tenderer. I would like it always to be quicker.”

This article was published by ADBR on March 22, 2022.

An additional article focused on the launch of the Space Command was published by the Australian Department of Defence on March 23, 2022 and was entitled Defence Soars Into Space:

As Defence enters into a new space era with the establishment of Defence Space Command, the release of the Defence Space Strategy sets a vector to assure Australia’s access to space for civilian and military uses.

Chief of the Defence Force General Angus Campbell said space was critical to ADF warfighting effectiveness, situational awareness, and the delivery of real-time communications in the current geostrategic environment.

“We must be able to generate space power across the Defence portfolio, supporting the joint force, whole of government, allies and international partners. We must also protect billions of dollars’ worth of commercial and military assets against space debris, collisions and destructive acts,” General Campbell said.

“The decision to create a single organisation to coordinate and manage Defence’s endeavours in space is significant. Defence Space Command brings members of Navy, Army, Air Force, the Australian Public Service and contractors together under an integrated headquarters reporting to the Chief of Air Force as the Space Domain Lead.” 

Chief of Air Force Air Marshal Mel Hupfeld said Defence had the responsibility of assuring Australia’s access to space for civilian and military users in a safe and sustainable space environment. 

“Advancing Australia’s space power requires a shift in thinking that recognises and supports space as a contested operational domain rather than simply being an enabler to other domains,” Air Marshal Hupfeld said.

“The Government has committed to significantly increasing investment in Defence’s space capabilities by investing around $7 billion this decade to assure our access to space, space services and geospatial information.

“While technologies and systems are important, they are only part of what enables the delivery of space power. Our people and partners will bring the curiosity, creativity and collaborative spirit required to conceive the space power required to meet our future challenges.” 

Led by Defence Space Commander Air Vice-Marshal Cath Roberts, Defence Space Command was established to assure Australia’s access to space to defend Australia, our national interests, and promote global security and stability.

“Space is the ultimate high ground. What we see from space gives us an unsurpassed advantage in surveillance and intelligence. It is central to how we will fight and win in the future across multi-domain operations, using advanced hypersonics, precision strike missiles and guided weapons,” Air Vice-Marshal Roberts said.

“We are enhancing our sovereign capabilities so Australia can be self-reliant in the detection of threats and collection of information for the defence of our nation. This is crucial to gaining timely, accurate information for the safety and capability of our forces. 

“This evolution of our operational capability will see us become an active contributor in space and ensure we can efficiently and effectively respond to space incidents when required.

“The newly released Defence Space Strategy sets the trajectory for Defence to assure Australia’s access to space. The immediate priority for Defence is to better integrate the many diverse elements of space capability.  

“We will look at innovative ways to expand our space capability to meet unique Australian requirements and develop our partnerships with industry and academia. 

“Australia’s geographical location and vast open land in the southern hemisphere helps us see things that others can’t. We will continue to work closely with our allies and international partners to mutually assure the responsible use of the space domain.  

“Together we will reach for the stars to protect Australia – our freedom, our values and our way of life.”

The featured photo shows the Defence Minister announcing the launch of the space command at the 2022 Airpower Conference held in Canberra.

The Requirements of a Sovereign Defence Space Capability

By Robert Czulda

Ukraine needs to be supplied with heavy weaponry.

Ukrainian defenders are usually depicted by media as mainly light infantry, armed with lethal yet mobile anti-tank systems. This image is as romantic but misleading. There is a good reason to do this, at least from the Ukrainian point of view – a war with Russia is presented as a clash between David and Goliath.  Only David – weaker and doomed for a defeat – gains sympathy.

However, this is a false narrative – Ukraine has been relying mostly on heavy weaponry, such as artillery, armored vehicles and tanks. Without them, Ukraine would not be able to resist the aggressor for so long.

While Russia still has the ability to replace lost vehicles – although these capabilities are slowly depleting – Ukraine, which has weaker mechanized forces, does not have such comfort (especially now, when various Ukrainian heavy factories were either destroyed or damaged). For Ukraine, every tank and heavy artillery is now worth its weight in gold.

NATO member states should jointly supply Ukraine with heavy weaponry.

Obviously, the Ukrainian Army was not trained to operate tanks, artillery systems or armored vehicles of Western origin. Such trainings would take many weeks or even months. Therefore, the most feasible and logic idea is to supply Ukraine with equipment they already know and could start using straight after deliveries. Such weaponry can be still found both in the Balkans and Central-Eastern Europe.

We do not know exactly how large Ukraine’s losses in heavy equipment are. Kyiv – which is also understandable – does not provide information on this subject.

According to Oryx, Ukraine lost at least 501 vehicles: 185 were destroyed, 10 damaged, 37 abandoned, while 269 were captured by the enemy. Regardless of a real scale of loses, without deliveries of heavy arms (including munition and spare parts mainly for field repairs), Ukraine will not only be unable to carry out any counter-offensive that is necessary to recapture the lost territory, but ultimately will loose a war of attrition.

In other words: tanks, artillery and armored vehicles are crucial, if Ukraine wants to stand its ground.

Undoubtedly Ukraine has been depleting its armor strength, which is based on various variants of the T-64 tank (upgraded by indigenous industry). This is a child of the Soviet Union, but in fact it was designed and manufactured on the Ukrainian soil – by Kharkiv Morozov Machine Building Design Bureau.

Kharkiv is now an arena of fierce fights. Ukraine cannot be supplied with additional T-64s, since this model has never been used by any post-communist Central-Eastern European state.

It means that the most likely tank that Ukraine could get, would be the T-72, which exists in numerous variants (however they are inferior to Russian T-72B3 model). These tanks are still in used by several NATO states, such as Poland (which also has the PT-91 Twardy tank – this is a local development of the T-72M1), Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia.

Although their combat value is currently limited, even modest deliveries could increase combat capabilities of the Ukrainian Army (including their mobility).

The same applies to armored vehicles – Ukraine has several types, BTR-4s, BTR-80s and BTR-70s. Some of them could be found in North Macedonia or Slovakia. The most obvious vehicle, which is possessed by several NATO member states, is the BMP-1 tracked infantry fighting vehicle. They are still owned by Bulgaria, Slovakia, the Czech Republic (BVP-1 variant) or mainly Poland (the latter has roughly 1,000 vehicles, which are expected to be replaced in a near future by a locally designed AIFV, known as BORSUK/BADGER).

Ukrainian artillery, which is used excessively, could be reinforced too. Ukraine is, so far, quite successful in integrating UAVs with artillery – while the former detects targets, the latter are used to engage them from a safe distance.

Apart from towed artillery (such as D-30 or D-20), Ukraine has numerous self-propelled systems, including 2S1 Gvozdika, 2S3 Akatsiya, 2S7 Pion, 2S5 Giatsint-S, not to mention rocket artillery (BM-21 Grad, BM-27 Uragan or BM-30 Smerch).

While majority of these systems are not in stock among NATO member states, and thus they could not be delivered to Ukraine, some are – either still in service or in reserve.

For instance, 2S1s are still possessed by Bulgaria, Croatia or Poland. Most likely Ukraine still has enough artillery pieces (many pieces are in reserves), but lacks ammo. NATO could help Ukraine by facilitating transfer of proper munition.

A significant boost to Ukrainian warfighting capabilities would be air-defense systems, other than MANPADS, which are highly useful but have significant limitations.

According to some sources, the Pentagon has confirmed that there were “ongoing discussions” with NATO allies regarding “transfers of defenses capabilities to include long-range air defenses, that we know that they’re comfortable using”. The most likely supplier is Slovakia, which has the S-300 long range surface-to-air missile system. The same system is used by other NATO member states, such as Bulgaria and Greece.

According to some rumors, there are also discussions with Ankara, who owns the S-400 (an upgraded variant), but the system has never been introduced by the Turkish military into operational service.

By donating the S-400s to Ukraine, Ankara would harm its ties with Russia, but at the same time it would give Erdogan an opportunity to improve highly strained relations with NATO and particularly the United States. However, there is a significant problem – the Ukrainians have not been trained to use the S-400.

It is worth adding that reportedly the United States has already sent to Ukraine the 9K33 Osa (SA-8) highly mobile, low-altitude, short-range tactical surface-to-air missile system. Some units can be still found in Greece, Romania or Poland.

Such deliveries would possible under three conditions.

First, there need to be a secure land corridor between NATO and Ukraine (so far the Russian Army was unable to launch an offensive and cut it off).

Secondly, this should be a decision of all NATO member states – all partners need share a certain burden. While some states would donate their equipment – and in consequence they would reduce their defense capabilities and expose to Russian responses – other states would have to step in and first assist them by providing interim substitute capabilities and later by donating their own surplus equipment.  There are also some good examples – both the Netherlands and Germany agreed to deploy their Patriot missile defense systems to Slovakia). Moreover, countries willing to donate its equipment, should be financially assisted by other NATO member states, who could then cover at least partial costs of new systems they would need to procure.

Thirdly, the United States must take more active role and become a real leader – this is widely expected by Central-Eastern Europe.

Both societies and governments are looking for more solid security commitments and assistance. The West, including the White House, cannot expect the most vulnerable NATO member states, located on a frontline with Russia – such as Poland, Slovakia or Romania – to unilaterally show acts of courage.

Let’s hope that a planned visit of President Joe Biden in Poland this Friday will meet expectations of the region.

Featured Photo: Photo 129987699 / Ukraine War © Oleksandr Ilin | Dreamstime.com

Dr. Robert Czulda is an Assistant Professor at the University of Lodz, Poland. He is a former Visiting Professor at the Center for International and Security Studies at Maryland (CISSM) under a Fulbright Senior Award.

Dr. Czulda is an Alum of the Young Leaders Dialogue of the U.S. Department of State (2010– 2011), and has lectured at universities in Iran, Brazil, Indonesia, Ireland, Lithuania, Turkey and Slovakia, as well as the National Cheng-chi University in Taipei.

He is a freelance defense journalist as well and has published widely on Polish defense and related issues.

Dr. Czulda’s area of expertise is international security and defense.