02/23/18:U.S. Army and Polish Paratroopers conducted a joint air assault exercise to improve and practice their basic soldier tasks and drills.
KOSOVO
01.19.2018
Video by Sgt. Michael A Parker
Multinational Battle Group – East (KFOR
Freefall from the Osprey
02/21/201802/21/18: Marines with 3rd Reconnaissance Battalion, 3rd Marine Division, 3rd Marine Expeditionary Force, perform jumps out of MV-22 Osprey’s at Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms, Calif., Jan. 18, 2018 as a part of Integrated Training Exercise 2-18.
The purpose of ITX is to create a challenging, realistic training environment that produces combat-ready forces capable of operating as an integrated Marine Air Ground Task Force.
TWENTYNINE PALMS, CA, UNITED STATES
01.18.2018
Video by Cpl. Christian Lopez
Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms
UK Signs Support Deal for C-17s
02/19/2018
2018-02-19 Recently, the UK Ministry of Defence signed an agreement with the US to support RAF C-17 heavy lift transport aircraft into the next decade.
According to a story published on the UK Ministry of Defence website:
The Foreign Military Sale agreement will provide support for the RAF’s fleet of eight C-17A Globemaster III aircraft, which provided lifesaving humanitarian relief following Hurricane Irma last summer.
Defence Minister Guto Bebb said:
“Our C-17 giants take everything from heavy equipment to vital troops to where they’re needed right across the globe.
“This deal keeps them in the air into the next decade and affirms our leadership, alongside our American allies, in providing global security and humanitarian aid as we stand together in defence of our shared values.”
“This bilateral deal will deliver spares, design services, reliability and maintenance improvements, access to technical resources, and RAF aircrew and maintenance crew training programmes.
It will sustain more than 50 jobs in the UK through the support of a Boeing team at RAF Brize Norton, the home of the UK’s C-17 operators, 99 Squadron RAF.
Further work will be carried out in the US at Boeing facilities in San Antonio, Texas.
The new agreement, which extends and builds upon support arrangements that have existed since the C-17 came into UK service in 2001, will run until 2022.
As part of the UK’s Joint Rapid Reaction Force, the C-17 provides the RAF with long-range strategic heavy-lift ability, meaning it can deliver equipment and supplies close to where UK troops are on operations.
Support for the RAF’s C-17 fleet is delivering an important need laid out in the Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015.
Defence Equipment & Support Chief of Materiel (Air), Air Marshal Julian Young, said:
“The signature of this deal has come about through the close relationship the Ministry of Defence has with our counterparts in the US, and will deliver world-leading support for the front line.
“It means the UK will be able to continue to depend on the C-17’s remarkable capabilities in support of operations all over the world.”
With a maximum airspeed of around 510 miles per hour, the jet can transport 77 tonnes of cargo, equivalent to three Apache attack helicopters or a Challenger 2 tank, and has a wingspan equivalent to the length of five double-decker buses.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/260m-deal-signed-to-keep-raf-giants-flying
UK Minister of Defence Visits Australia
2018-02-19 UK forces have been present in various exercises in Asia and the UK and the Australians are working closely together as the two countries shape a 21st century combat force.
There is a clear interactivity between the RAAF and the RAF rethink about 21st century air combat power as well.
Recently, the UK Minister of Defence visited to Australia and that visit highlighted the UK perspective regarding their engagement in the region.
In an article published on the UK Ministry of Defence website on February 12, 2017, the visit was highlighted.
In his first trip to Australia as Secretary of State for Defence, Mr Williamson met his counterpart, Minister for Defence, Marise Payne, in Sydney.
They examined how both allies can continue to adapt in the face of cyber-attacks and nuclear threats from North Korea and how best to counter global terrorism.
Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said:
“Britain and Australia both face intensifying, complex and evolving threats to our way of life. That is why it is so important our two countries stand side-by-side to stay ahead of those who want to harm us.
“Two Royal Navy warships, HMS Sutherland and HMS Argyll, are heading to the region to continue the pressure campaign on North Korea, demonstrating Britain’s role on the international stage.
“We have a long and historic relationship with Australia but today we are modern, equal, and global powers with shared values and a commitment to make the world a safer place.”
As part of this modern partnership the UK and Australia:
- Have more than one hundred people from all three services on exchange programmes between our nations, working together and learning from each other;
- Are part of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing organisation and work together on tackling shared threats;
- Hold annual meetings of foreign and defence ministers (AUKMIN) to coordinate responses to shared threats, such as Daesh;
- Work together on the mission to establish stability in Syria and Afghanistan, to which Australia is the largest non-NATO contributor;
- Combine on humanitarian missions, such as: the two Malaysian airline incidents, Ebola in Sierra Leone and disaster relief in Vanuatu;
- Police the seas as part of the Combined Maritime Forces, to provide security and stability on the seas, including tackling drug and weapon smugglers;
- Work together on science and technology, and defence equipment.
Additionally, Royal Navy ship HMS Sutherland will visit Australia in February and March, allowing further opportunities for the two naval forces to collaborate.
The UK Defence Secretary also met Minister for Defence Industry, Christopher Pyne, in Canberra today (Monday 12 Feb) to discuss exciting new defence export opportunities as Britain prepares to leave the European Union.
The Type 26 Global Combat Ship is a key example of this and has been shortlisted for Australia’s Future Frigate Programme.
The cutting-edge warship would not only boost the partnership between the two countries, but would bolster Australia ballistic missile defences and give them an unrivalled anti-submarine warfare capability to face growing underwater threats.
Mr Williamson went on to meet Minister for Veterans’ Affairs and Defence Personnel, Michael McCormack, to talk about issues impacting and sharing research on Veterans and the successes of the British Armed Forces Covenant.
Australian forces recently solved a 103-year-old mystery when they discovered His Majesty’s Australian Submarine AE1, the first Allied submarine lost in World War One, off the coast of Papua New Guinea.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/defence-secretary-hails-modern-partnership-with-australia
The South African Naval Shipbuilding Industry: An Overview
2018-02-19 By Guy Martin
South Africa’s shipbuilding industry produces hundreds of vessels every year, with more than 90% being exported, and this includes naval vessels, from rigid-hulled inflatables to large patrol boats.
South Africa’s naval shipbuilding industry took off during the Second World War, when ships up to 14 000 tons, such as the passenger vessel Esperance Bay, were converted by yards in Durban and Cape Town for the war effort. These shipyards also carried out maintenance and repair on naval vessels, including battleships and cruisers. A 17 000 ton floating dock was also built in Durban by Dorman Long (Africa) at the request of the British Admiralty and in 1945 this was towed to Singapore.
After the war’s end, the naval shipbuilding industry receded, although commercial shipbuilding continued in South Africa. From the 1950s naval activity picked up again, with local companies, and the Naval Dockyard in Simon’s Town, modernising and converting vessels for the South African Navy (SAN), including two destroyers from 1962-66; modifying the three president class frigates from 1967 to operate helicopters; and converting three tankers between 1966 and 1983 to allow for replenishment at sea, the carriage of helicopters and ability to launch landing craft. Smaller craft, including three tugs, were also built for the SA Navy.
Activity picked up from the 1970s when due to sanctions, South Africa was forced to build naval vessels locally.
The Suez crisis of 1972 also brought the maritime industry to the government’s attention, and the state helped establish Barship, Dorman Long Vanderbijl (later renamed Dorbyl) and James Brown & Hamer (now Elgin Brown & Hamer) in Durban.
Dorbyl (now Dormac Marine) has built a large number of vessels including more than 20 harbour tugs, the South African Navy torpedo recovery ship SAS Fleur (the first warship ever to be designed and built in South Africa, commissioned in 1969), trawlers, cargo and container ships, the small coastal tanker Oranjemund and the research ship Africana. James Brown & Hamer built the salvage tug John Ross, which is still in service as the Smit Amandla.
Barship later became Sandock Austral and for many years was the most important naval shipbuilder in South Africa. Between 1978 and 1986 it built eight vessels for the Navy, including six strike craft (another three were imported from Israel). These are modified Israeli Sa’ar 4 (Reshef) designs, initially the Minister class and now the Warrior Class. Sandock Austral also built two River class minehunters – two were received from Germany as ‘research vessels’ to avoid the arms embargo while the other two were built in Durban.
One of the local shipbuilding industry’s greatest achievements was Sandock Austral’s construction of the locally designed combat support ship SAS Drakensberg, which was laid down in 1984 and commissioned in 1987. It is the largest, most sophisticated naval vessel to have been wholly designed and built in South Africa.
The 147 metre long SAS Drakensberg’s primary role is to support and assist naval vessels at sea – thus enabling the SA Navy to deploy its forces for extensive periods over long distances. She is designed and equipped to operate two large helicopters simultaneously.
Other locally built vessels around this time included the Namacurra harbour patrol boats (built by Sandock Austral and exported to Malawi, Mozambique and Namibia); Delta 80 landing craft and three 22 metre patrol boats in 1992.
Up until the Strategic Defence Procurement Packages in 1998, which saw the acquisition of four Meko A200 (Valour class) frigates and three Type 1400 Heroine class submarines, the local industry upgraded the strike craft, Daphne submarines and minehunters. Many local companies were involved with outfitting the new frigates and submarines, such as Reutech (radar and optronic trackers and 12.7 mm turrets), Denel Dynamics (Umkhonto missiles) and Saab Grintek Defence and Sysdel (countermeasures).
Emerging from Dorbyl and Sandock Austral was Southern African Shipyards (SAS), which became an independent company in 1996.
Based in Durban, it is South Africa’s largest shipbuilder and has built both commercial, private and naval vessels. For example, SAS supplied 12 tugs to the Transnet National Ports Authority (TNPA) and will this year deliver the last of nine new Voith Schneider tugs for the TNPA under a R1.4 billion contract – the largest ever awarded to a South African company for the building of harbour craft.
On the naval side SAS has done major refit work on the South African Navy’s frigate SAS Amatola, in one of the single largest work packages awarded by the Navy to a private sector company in decades. SAS has also done upgrade work on the Warrior class strike craft converted to offshore patrol vessels.
Southern African Shipyards is to build a new hydrographic survey vessel for the South African Navy under Project Hotel.
The current vessel, SAS Protea, will be replaced by 2019-20. Project Hotel also includes two fully integrated inshore survey motorboats and the upgrading of current shore-based hydrographic office infrastructure at Silvermine. The new vessel will cost an estimated R1.8 billion. SAS was offering the Vard Marine 9 105 design to meet the requirements.
Further down south lies one of South Africa’s biggest shipbuilders.
The Nautic group offers a wide lineup of civil and military vessels, such as workboats, patrol boats, crew transfer vessels, ferries and dive daughter craft, from 8.5m fast interceptors upwards, with the potential to build vessels up to 42 metres in length. The group has several subsidiaries, including Nautic South Africa, Paramount Naval Systems, Nautic Properties, Southern Power Products, the Anchor Boat Shop, Austral Marine and Veecraft Marine.
Paramount Naval Systems focuses on the naval side of the business and offers the manufacture, maintenance and refurbishment of light strike craft, river and off-shore patrol vessels and rapid intervention vessels.
It also offers hovercraft through a partnership with the UK’s Griffon Hoverwork and has partnerships with shipbuilders like Navantia, Austal and DCNS. A number of 35 metre Sentinel multirole vessels have been built for export customers, particularly in West Africa. They can be used for patrol or transport as they can be armed and armoured.
The Nautic group has delivered on a number of recent military contracts, such as five boarding boats to the SA Navy, two 11 metre workboats and a 20 metre ferry for the SA Special Forces, seven 8.5 metre Guardian BR850 interceptor boats for Malawi, and 14 RHIBs for Nigeria’s Navy.
Nautic company Veecraft has done a lot of military work, and has, amongst others, supplied two 14 metre, 60-knot fast interceptors, two 8 metre boarding boats and two 6 metre harbour patrol boats for the Namibian Navy to designs by KND Naval Design. The company previously delivered Project Xena riverine patrol boats for the SA Navy’s Maritime Reaction Squadron.
The Cape’s other largest shipbuilder is Damen Shipyards Cape Town, a subsidiary of its Dutch parent, which builds dredgers, patrol craft, tugs and offshore support vessels.
Its Cape Town yard has constructed over 40 vessels for the African continent, including two ATD 2909 tugs for the SA Navy, which entered service in 2015 and 2016, replacing the De Neys and De Mist, built in 1969 and 1978.
A potentially big contract for the shipyard is the South African Navy’s Project Biro for inshore/offshore patrol vessels. The Navy is also looking to acquire three inshore and three offshore patrol vessels, but there is still no finalisation of the main contractor – in February 2017 Damen Shipyards Cape Town was selected as the preferred contractor for Biro, but the offshore patrol component request for offer was subsequently cancelled.
A number of smaller players operate in the naval space, such as Stingray Marine, which built the Lima Boat light utility landing craft for the SA Navy, and also manufactures inflatable boats for special operations and inshore patrol.
Achieving widespread export success is Gemini Marine, which builds inflatables, rigid inflatables and aluminium rigid buoyancy craft for military, police and other applications. Its customers include the Royal Australian and New Zealand navies, the Singapore Navy and Indonesian armed forces, police forces in several countries, and the South African Army, Navy and Special Forces.
Other players include Marine & General Engineering of Durban, which built several 12 metre riverine patrol boats for the SA Navy to designs from KND Naval Design; Stealth Yachts, which offers a hydrofoil supported catamaran (HYSUCAT) patrol craft; Hyscat, which offers a range of patrol boats; and Rhino Marine, which has developed an extremely robust high-density polyethylene (HDPE) boarding boat, which has been demonstrated to the South African Navy.
Apart from dedicated boat-building, most other sectors of the naval industry are well covered in South Africa.
For instance, Hensoldt Optronics designs and manufactures optical periscopes for submarines and has exported a number of them. Saab Grintek Defence has exported self-defence equipment and naval communications while Thales South Africa supplies consoles for French Navy FREMM frigates. Reutech has exported naval radars and weapons turrets and Cybicom Atlas Defence (CAD) supplies test beds, combat management systems and simulators.
Denel Integrated Systems and Maritime (Denel ISM) will manage the Simon’s Town Naval Dockyard and take responsibility for maintenance and upgrades on the SAN’s three Heroine Class submarines and four Valour class frigates in collaboration with the manufacturer ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems (TKMS).
Lastly, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) has developed a dismountable single-point davit system for use aboard the SA Navy’s large vessels as well as the SeaFar maritime domain awareness system, and the Institute for Maritime Technology (IMT) has developed maritime domain awareness technology and an autonomous underwater vehicle (AUV) for mine countermeasures work, amongst others.
Republished with permission of our partner defenceWeb.
Finland and New Combat Aircraft: Looking Back at the Hornet Acquisition
2018-02-16 By Robbin Laird
Helsinki, Finland
The Finnish government is set to acquire 64 new fighter jets for its air force.
This is occurring as Nordic defense is being reworked, and the Northern European states are sorting out how to deal with what the Finnish Defense Minister Jussi Niinistö has referred to as the “new normal” in Russian behavior.
“It’s important that our armed forces have the equipment that they need to fulfill all of their fundamental roles,” said Niinistö.
Niinistö has described Russia’s more unpredictable behavior in the greater Baltic Sea region, particularly in the areas of political influencing methods and security policies, as the “new normal”.
“Changes in the security environment and the multi-purpose use or threat of power have become a new normal. Russia has shown in Ukraine and Syria that it possesses both the capacity and the will to use military power to push its goals,”
The new combat aircraft will be part of an integrated Finnish defense force in the evolving strategic environment of the 2020’s.
It is important to remember that the last major acquisition also occurred in a significant period of change for Finland in its strategic neighborhood.
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the dynamics of change in the new Russian republic, Finland was able to negotiate its way out of the Cold War agreement with Russia in which Finland was committed to cooperate with Russia militarily in the case that an aggressor was threatening to use Finnish territory to attack the Soviet Union.
The agreement required mutual affirmation of the threat and the engagement but nonetheless was a major curb on Finnish military independence.
With the end of this agreement, and then the unification of Germany, and the opening of a new chapter in the development the European Union, Finland positioned itself for membership in the European Union in 1995.
The EU treaty contains a mutual security agreement for all of the members as well.
It was in this period of dynamic change, that Finland acquired new fighters for its air force, F-18 Hornet aircraft.
A Finnish Air Force F/A-18 Hornet conducts an aerial refueling mission over Finland with a U.S. Air Force KC-135 Stratotanker assigned to RAF Mildenhall, England, May 25, 2017. Both aircraft participated in Arctic Challenge 2017, a multinational exercise encompassing 11 nations and more than 100 aircraft. (U.S. Air Force photo by Tech. Sgt. David Dobrydney)
In 1992, the Finnish government placed an order for 64 McDonnell Douglas aircraft.
And at the time of the sale a Finnish diplomat explained the deal this way:
“Until now, Finland’s neutrality made defense procurement difficult. But from now on, Finland will defend herself by her own means.”
In other words, much like new fighter aircraft will be purchased in a new strategic context of the 2020’s, the first big modernization of the Finnish Air Force in the post cold war period occurred in a period of significant strategic change.
Buying fighter aircraft for Finland is a challenge but clearly connected to a broader strategic context.
This was well summed up by the distinguished Finnish historian, Henrik Meinander, in his 2013 book on the history of Finland as follows:
“The government emphatically denied that there were any security policy considerations behind the purchase of the Hornet, but everything points to the contrary.
“The acquisition of modern defense technology has always had a political dimension, since the supply and maintenance of equipment necessities continuing collaboration with the foreign manufacturer.
“This aircraft meant that Finland’s air defenses became compatible with NATO’s almost immediately.
“It was only two months earlier that Finland had submitted its application to the EC/EUU, and it was doing all that it could to show that it was a country whose defense and security policy would not be a burden for the EU.
“The pilots were sent to the USA for training, and the first jet planes were flown across the Atlantic in 1995.
“Cooperation increased in the period 1996-2000 as 56 of the jets were assembled in Finland and gradually connected to the NATO satellite system and other technical infrastructure.”[ref]Henrik Meinander, A History of Finland (Oxford University Press, 2013), p. 195.[/ref]
During my visit to Helsinki in February 2018, this is what one Finnish analyst had to say about the challenge in acquiring the Hornets, but also the significance of the acquisition:
“It was a very bold move in the early 1990s.
“With the collapse of the Soviet Union, we lost a significant market and we had a huge recession with unemployment rising significantly.
“Timing was everything.
“If the decision had been delayed, it would not have been made.
“The purchase of the Hornets expanded dramatically the cooperation with the United States and other members of NATO and allowed cooperation to become real.
“At first, there was skepticism about the potential quality of the Finnish pilots but soon the US realized that Finnish pilots are first rate.
“And this also laid the foundation in the United States, that Finland is a credible regional partner.
“We do what we promise and by providing advanced weapon systems to Finland, it’s a stabilizing factor for the region as well.”
In short, understanding how the Finns see the evolving strategic situation is crucial to understand how they will address not only defense modernization, but integration of their forces nationally and with core coalition partners.
Editor’s Note: In late 2015, the initial report on replacing the Hornet was released by the Finnish government.
The working group which was set up to make a preliminary assessment of how to replace the operational capability of the Air Force F/A-18 aircraft proposes procurement of multi-role fighters. The capabilities of multi-role fighters would be complemented with air defence capabilities. The need and possibilities to procure unmanned aircraft and other complementing capabilities will be analysed at a later point.
The capabilities of multi-role fighters play a significant role in securing a pre-emptive threshold which would stop a possible aggressor from using military force against Finland. The capabilities of fighters form an integral part of air defence and the ability of the Defence Forces to use fire power to impact targets on land and at sea.
The life cycle of F/A-18 fighters will terminate by the end of next decade. It is not possible to replace their operational capability with anti-aircraft weapons or unmanned aircraft alone since both systems would only cover a part of the capabilities of the Hornet aircraft.
The project to replace F/A-18 fighters will extend approximately over 15 years. According to the report of the working group, the project needs to be launched in autumn 2015 at the latest. Project-related information requests should be made and, ultimately, invitations for tenders sent during the current parliamentary term.
The procurement decision should be made at the beginning of 2020s.
The working group submitted its report to the Minister of Defence on 11 June 2015.
And looking further back in Finnish history, the video below looks at the air war over Finland from 1939-1940.
During the years 1939 -1940 Finland was engaged in the Winter War and the Continuation War against the Soviet Union.
The Finnish Air Force had to fight against a massively superior force from the very outset of the Winter War on the 30th November 1939.
In the first two days of that war more than 10 enemy aircraft were shot down.
In spite of the opponent’s overwhelming superiority of numbers the Finnish Air Force managed to achieve many victories until the Soviet Union sent large reinforcements to the front, equipped with more technically advanced aircraft.
This advantage enabled them to obtain air supremacy towards the final stage of the war.
When the Continuation War broke out in Spring 1941, the Finnish Air Force was more effective because of better equipment and additional personnel which resulted in air supremacy being achived on all sectors of the front.
It was not until the expensive offensive by the enemy which began in June 1944 that the Soviet Union gained air supremacy through their overwhelming resources which eventually faltered because of effective defence tactics and counter-attack measures.
The Finnish Air Force faced a very skillful German opponent in the Lapland War of 1944-1945 although, by comparison, it was on a smaller scale.
Taking into consideration the numerous victories won and the favorable aerial reconnaissance results obtained by the Finnish Air Force, its aims were achieved with honour.
In addition to combat and bombing operations, the Finnish Air Force carried out effective scouting missions which were of vital importance for both land and naval forces.
This video shows successful operations by the Finnish Air Force in Winter War and the Continuation War of 1939-1945.
The video consists mainly of films which have been shot by war-time photographers.
A significant part of this material has not been published before.
By this movie The Air Force Foundation wishes to honour those persons whose deeds were admired and respected by the Finnish nation and the whole world.
Another interesting slice of Finnish airpower history involves flying the Buffaloes, an aircraft acquired from the United States and flown during World War II.
Q: Why did the Finns achieve so much with the Buffalo?
A: First off, the Finnish Brewsters weren’t Brewster Buffaloes, or Brewster 339’s, or F2A-2, which were very bad fighters.
They were Model 239’s much closer to the original USN F2A-1, which were reported to be delightful to fly.
Finnish nickname “Taivaan Helmi” “Pearl of the Skies” reflects this.
Also, Finnish Brewsters had reflector sights and reliable armament of three heavy machine guns and one rifle-caliber mg. (later on four heavy MG’s) and seat armour.
The Finnish Air Force also used innovative modern air combat tactics, such as largely relying on finger four / Thach Weave / Schwarm, whatever you call it, against doctrinal Soviet tactics, such as using three plane flights and “Spanish circle” described later on.
In 1941 many of the Finnish Buffalo pilots had had combat experience during the Winter War, and air combat tactics were modified and developed. Mock dogfights were made against captured russian planes.
Training with Brewsters hadn’t been so good as it might have been, since the severe shortage of aviation fuel in 1940-1941.
The quality of Soviet planes in 1941, when the best kill ratio 67.5 – 1) was achieved, was lower than Brewsters, most common types being used were SB-2, DB-3, I-16 and I-153.
Finally, there was element of luck.
The fighter squadron the Brewsters were in most of the war, 24, was commanded by an excellent commander, Major G. Magnusson, a great organizer and tactician who is considered to be “Grand Old Man” of the Finnish fighter aviation.
By almost sheer luck, some of the finest pilots of the Finnish Air Force were in the Brewster Squadron when the war started, such as Hans Wind, Ilmari Juutilainen, Joppe Karhunen and Lauri Nissinen, each one of them later on gaining huge kill numbers also with Messerschmitt 109G-2’s and G-6’s.
The Brewsters probably could have made even more kills, but the Finnish fighter control system during the Brewster’s golden age in 1941-42 was abysmal. For an example, sometimes the alert messages were only somekind like this: “Village of Inkeroinen is being bombed” and arrived as much as 15 minutes too late. But by the summer 1944 it was excellent.
Criticism against Finnish ground control system and FAF brass in general has been extremely harsh by Joppe Karhunen, a Brewster ace and an aviation historian.
Q: How was it possible to achieve victories with Brewsters over the Soviet planes even as late as 1944?
A: Tactics, especially using Brewster’s good dogfight qualities, excellent command and control, high quality of Finnish pilots and low quality of Soviet pilots.
MAGTF Trains for Fire Support
02/18/201802/18/18: Marines with 3rd Battalion, 7th Marine Regiment participate in Fire Support Coordination Exercise at training area Quackenbush aboard the Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center Twentynine Palms, Calif., Jan. 19, 2018.
The training exercise gave Marines an opportunity to practice a challenging, realistic training environment that produces combat-ready forces capable of operating as an integrated Marine Air Ground Task Force.
TWENTYNINE PALMS, CA, UNITED STATES
01.19.2018
Video by Lance Cpl. Jennessa Davey
Marine Corps Air Ground Combat Center, Twentynine Palms
Crafting a Way Ahead for the Defense of Finland: The Perspective of the Head of the Defense Policy Branch in the Ministry of Defence, Finland
02/17/2018
2018-02-15 By Robbin Laird
Helsinki, Finland
During my current visit to Helsinki, I had a chance to meet and to discuss the way ahead for Finnish defense with Janne Kuusela, Director General, Defense Policy Department of the Finnish Ministry of Defence.
According to the Finnish Ministry of Defence website:
The Defence Policy Department is responsible for assessing the development of the security and defence policy environment.
The Department provides the grounds for defence policy and the planning basis for the defence forces.
It deals with matters concerning general national defence capability, conscription, military crisis management, peace support operations and disarmament and arms control.
The department consists of four units:
- Defence Cooperation Unit
- National Defence Unit
- Research Unit
- Scientific Advisory Board for Defence
During our discussion, we focused on four key issues.
Focus on Territorial Defense
First, Kuusela underscored that Finland has never shifted from its basic defense focus on the priority for the defense of Finnish territory.
While many European states, de-emphasized national or territorial defense, and shifted their forces to specialized force packages useful for working in coalition inside and outside of Europe.
“We have bought specialized equipment for some engagements, such as desert uniforms.
“But by and large our focus has been clearly upon territorial defense.
“When the Crimean crisis occurred, it was not an event that forced us to refocus on territorial defense. We were there already.”
Conscription and Defending the Homeland
Second, conscription has been an important part of Finnish defense, but there is an increasing emphasis on enhanced readiness.
This means shifting emphasis from training conscripts to getting as well better combat readiness out of the mobilization force.
He argued that one advantage of the conscription process is that the Finnish government was in a position to identify candidates for the professional military and with the increased “tech savy” required to man a 21st century force, this also allowed for exposure to some of the best candidates to serve in the military to provide for the relevant expertise for a 21st century force.
“It is a two-way street with the population.
“The reservists bring back a lot of current information about technology and society which can then be tapped by the professional military as well as the professional military providing up to date information on the evolution of military systems.
“I think this is a key capability as new equipment is more technologically sophisticated.”
Shaping a Process of Change: A Priority on Security of Supply and Distributed Ops
Third, change is being made to enhance inherent advantages of the Finnish defense approach.
C2 is an especially important part of the Finnish military given the size and location of the country and the Finns have built a modern C2 system which they leverage for the military operation son their territory.
It is also the case, that the trend to shape distributed operational forces has a solid foundation in Finland as well for in their training and preparation they disperse force away from the training bases to flexible operational settings within the country.
“We have also modified our legislation to allow for more rapid and effective crisis decision making which is a key requirement for the new situation as well.”
In the Finnish defense policy document published last year, the core point underscored was that the threshold for the use of military force is lower and the time to respond shorter.
Obviously, given this characterization, C2 and crisis management systems are central pieces for shaping a 21st century defense and security capability for Finland.
This also highlights the importance of the security of supply.
“Given the short time span when you have a crisis going on, you need to fight with what you have in your stocks at that given moment, so you can’t expect to fly overseas to buy more.”
“We have heard a lot about anti-access and area denial.
“But that is our objective as well for the defense of Finland. “we’ve designed our defense so that if there is crisis we will not use our bases which we used in peacetime.
“The garrisons and the air bases and naval base will be empty, and our military will operate all around the country.
“Because we have mobilization force and we have to store our gear in the right kind of places so they are secure but they’re also available for distribution in times of crisis.”
Shaping a Modernization Effort
Fourth, the foundation is solid but needs modernization in terms of equipment and enhanced capabilities for joint and coalition operations.
This is being done in two key ways.
Finland is building out its partnerships and working relationship within the region and with the United States and other European states.
For example, with regard to the security of supply issue, the Nordics are now enhancing their collaboration to ensure better security of supply for the region.
“Last year, we held the rotating chairmanship of Nordic Defense Cooperation, and one of the main issues on the agenda was military security of supply and what can we do with our Nordic partners.
“This year Norway is carrying on for where we left off, and continuing a serious look at how can we join forces better among neighbors in the Nordic area.”
The second way is by modernization of ground equipment, shifting from older artillery pieces to more mobile longer-range capabilities and modernizing the navy and air force.
There is a concern with the cost necessary to modernize the force, but by enhancing joint operations and leveraging the capabilities of the new systems to be more efficient in terms of modernization and support, the case can be made that an effective modernization path can be forged.
This is crucial otherwise in Kuusela’s view we risk losing public support for investment in the defense systems which are needed.
“We understand that the dynamics of the integrated battlespace of the 21st century is quite different from the operational approaches of the 1980s and we need to adjust to the new realities.
“And in our region, for example, the Norwegians are introducing the F-35 and the sensors onboard the aircraft will have a significant impact on how one shapes a joint fires approach.”
In short, the Finns are shaping a way ahead for themselves, with their neighbors and are key stakeholder in shaping a new approach to Nordic and Northern European defense.
Editor’s Note: A good example of the changes in Finnish defense policy is highlighted in the following story published last year:
Defence Secretary of the UK: JEF forces ready to assist Finland – “Finland is not alone”
On Friday in Stockholm, Finland will sign an agreement on joining the 10 000-strong rapid response forces led by the UK.
The JEF (Joint Expeditionary Force) can be deployed to military operations anywhere in the world, including Finnish soil.
The UK’s contribution to the forces, which will be fully operational by the end of 2018, will include the lead commando, airborne, armoured, aviation, air and maritime task groups.
The UK Secretary of State for Defence Michael Fallon says in an interview with Lännen Media that the JEF can be deployed more rapidly and flexibly in an actual situation than the combat forces of NATO or the EU.
“The JEF is not NATO. It is NATO’s duty to respond to any Russian aggression, but NATO has 29 and the EU has 28 member states. They are extremely large organisations where decision-making is inevitably bureaucratic. The JEF is more adaptable and agile and can be deployed very quickly to humanitarian tasks, to rescue our citizens from crisis hotspots or to conduct more minor military missions,” Fallon describes.
Fallon: “Finland is not alone – it can be expected that our military cooperation with Finland will increase”
Fallon stresses that the UK wishes to enhance its bilateral defence cooperation with Finland. In a worst case scenario, could the government of Finland call London and request for military assistance?
“We help each other. We are already doing so through multiple groups, such as the Northern Group. The JEF provides yet another collective form of partnership, and its core is formed by the UK, The Netherlands, the Baltic states, Denmark and Norway.”
“So the answer is yes. Finland is not alone and Finland should not be alone,” says Fallon.
The history behind the JEF cooperation is interesting. Seven founding countries signed the agreement on 4 September, 2014, at the NATO Wales Summit on the air-defence destroyer HMS Duncan of the Royal Navy.
Russia had annexed Crimea in the previous spring. Russian troops had invaded Eastern Ukraine. In Wales, NATO decided to reinforce its NRF rapid response forces whose military exercises Finland has also participated in.
However, exercises are not the same as actual involvement.
The UK is the largest military power in Western Europe and needs its own national spearhead for demanding international operations. The British established the JEF together with “like-minded partners”, as Fallon describes the allies.
Now, Finland and Sweden are joining the JEF countries. Fallon says that the enhancement of military cooperation is linked to the UK’s separation from the EU.
“Exactly. Since we are leaving the EU, we wish to work even harder to strengthen our other partnerships, our membership in NATO and the JEF and our arrangements in Asia and the Pacific. We must also strengthen our bilateral ties. It can be expected that our military cooperation with Finland will increase,” Fallon stresses.
“I hope that the JEF will bring reassurance to countries like Finland and Sweden”
Peacetime cooperation focuses especially on participation in humanitarian operations under the UN. At the same time, the purpose of extremely rapid combat forces is to reinforce the deterrent, preventing the use of military force to threaten Finland, for example.
“We are like-minded countries and have worked together in the EU. Unfortunately, that will come to an end in two years. We are leaving the political union, which is why we are reinforcing our military partnerships. We are the lead nation of NATO’s Enhanced Forward Presence deployment in Estonia, but are also forming smaller and highly practical JEF task groups,” says Fallon.
He goes on to send a security policy message to Finns – and to the neighbours of Finland.
“I hope that the JEF will bring reassurance to countries like Finland and Sweden. Membership provides them with groups of friends who are ready to take action and provide assistance,” says Fallon.
One of the elements of the JEF are the British commandos.
Director-General Janne Kuusela: “We must make arrangements that enable that assistance while the going is good”
Director-General Janne Kuusela from The Defence Policy Department of the Ministry of Defence of Finland points out that it is too late to try to build aid mechanisms in a crisis.
“If and when we hope to receive assistance, we must make arrangements that enable that assistance while the going is good,” says Kuusela.
On 1 July, acts will enter into force in Finland to enable the provision of and request for military assistance.
Janne Kuusela, Director General, Defence Policy Department, Ministry of Defence, Finland
The force headquarters of the JEF were tested last year in Cornwall.
“This year, we will organise a Joint Venture exercise where we develop the forces towards becoming fully operational. It is entirely up to Finland to decide on the kinds of troops it considers appropriate for the JEF, which is a club of volunteers. Not every country is expected to take part in every mission,” Fallon points out.
Fallon says the JEF may train in Finland and elsewhere in the Baltic Sea region in the future.
According to Kuusela, Finland could initially offer an infantry company or, for instance, an NBC company specialising in the prevention of chemical threats. The company is about 200-strong and the NBC is about 50-strong in international operations.
“The JEF is probably faster”
Fallon emphasises the speed of the JEF. There is no formal decision-making mechanism, so, according to Fallon, the special forces of the JEF should be on location faster than e.g. NATO’s VJTF spearhead force, which must be ready to deploy within 48 hours.
“We want to keep the operations relatively informal and agile. The JEF is probably faster. I wish to emphasise that it is a group of like-minded members, separate from the NATO, who work together in practical situations.”
“The JEF is not designed against any particular threat, but as member of the JEF, Finland and Sweden can consider the other seven countries their natural allies,” Fallon defines.
During times of peace, the JEF may work to prevent dangerous diseases, evacuate citizens of member countries from crises or hijackings and prevent genocides, says Fallon.
“The best example that I can give of the JEF’s activities is the UK contribution to the prevention of Ebola in Sierra Leone where we delivered a hospital ship.”
“Whether the problem is in Tripoli, Beirut or Rwanda, and whether it be a British, Dutch or Norwegian plane that is deployed, the forces of the other countries may join in,” says Fallon.
Although the JEF is not NATO, one must ask about the threat that Russia poses in the Baltic Sea as Finland joins the rapid response forces of like-minded countries.
“We have seen a much more aggressive Russia in the past three years: the annexation of Crimea, the destabilisation of Eastern Ukraine and increased aerial activity and submarine operations. We will respond to the actions of Russia, but that will be done through NATO,” states Fallon.
Outside NATO, European military powers are rapidly enhancing their cooperation, and Finland is involved in this process through various arrangements.
Fallon says that the rapid response forces of the UK and France are prepared to join forces, if necessary.
“We are also enhancing our defence relations with Germany. These are new relations,” says Fallon, emphasising the UK’s strong will to defend Western Europe, which Finland also belongs to.