Denmark to join Nato's missile defense system

Denmark has decided to join NATO's missile defence system, local media reported Friday.

 

Denmark will contribute at least one frigate to NATO's missile defense shield, the country's Foreign Minister Martin Lidegaard said after a meeting of the Foreign Affairs Committee on Thursday afternoon.

"We will offer that one and more of our frigates can be outfitted with a radar that can be part of the missile defence. There was wide support for that (in the Foreign Affairs Committee)," Lidegaard was cited as saying by Denmark's newspaper Berlingske Tidende.

Denmark's Defense Minister Nikolai Wammen emphasized that the decision to join the missile defence system is not an action aimed at Russia.

"It is to protect the Danes against rogues states, terrorist organisations and others that have the capacity to fire missiles at Europe and the US," he said.

According to Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, it will cost some 400-500 million Danish kroner (71-89 million U.S. dollars) to equip Danish frigates with advanced radar equipment.

At the meeting, the Foreign Affairs Committee also decided that Denmark will send weapons and a contingent of troops to Iraq to fight the extremist Islamic State.

Turkey courts France in $3.4 bln missile project

Though China has been the front runner, Turkey has now turned toward France regarding the tender for a multi-billion dollar air defense system, according to unnamed sources close to the Undersecretariat for the Defense Industry (SSM) who spoke to Today's Zaman on Monday.

 

The sources said that SSM Undersecretary İsmail Demir held a secret meeting in France with the firm Eurosam regarding interest in the tender, which is expected to be one of the largest military projects in the history of the Turkish Republic.

 

Last year, Turkey chose a Chinese company for the tender, however the deadline for the tender has since been extended several times, allowing Turkey to pursue offers from other bidders.

 

If negotiations with the Chinese do not continue, Eurosam is second in line, while an American company has third priority, according to sources.

 

Ankara said last year that the $3.4 billion high technology offer from China Precision Machinery Import-Export Corporation (CPMIEC) would enable Turkey to co-produce the missiles and thus build a strong national defense industry, a factor that played a critical role in the initial selection of the Chinese firm.

 

CPMIEC is under US sanctions for selling items to Iran, Syria and North Korea that are banned under US law to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

Canada’s ballistic missile defence debate is stuck in a rut

An unarmed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile streaks through the sky of Vandenberg in California August 25, 2005. Rumours that the US has again asked Canada to join its ballistic missile defence program has sparked controversy in recent days


Canadians have always held strong opinions on the benefits and drawbacks of ballistic missile defence, so it is not surprising that the rumour that the United States has asked Canada to reconsider joining its BMD program has generated passionate dialogue.

And while there is nothing wrong with public debate on international affairs, arguments without the complete picture tend to obscure more than they reveal, making the current debate not just unnecessary, but also misleading.

Just as they did when Paul Martin announced that Ottawa would not join the US in developing ballistic missiles in 2005, BMD supporters emphasize North America’s vulnerability to external attack. They therefore advocate participation in the US program regardless of the terms of involvement.

Critics respond that a ballistic missile defence program for North America is unnecessary, not to mention expensive, and provocative. They therefore oppose Canadian participation (not to mention the American program itself) no matter the deal.

Neither side makes a convincing case.

Keeping in mind that the US will pursue BMD regardless of the thinking in Ottawa and among Canadians, the only real question for Canada is whether, based on the proposed terms of Canadian participation, it would be better to be on the outside looking in, or a direct part of the planning and implementation process.

A helpful debate might therefore consider the following questions:

Would participation in the US program make Canada itself more secure? And how might Canadians measure that security? What sorts of opportunities, for example, would involvement give Ottawa to affect US policy at the tactical and perhaps even operational levels?

What are the fiscal implications of joining, or not joining, the US ballistic missile defence program?

More specifically, how much, if anything, would it cost the Canadian government to participate?

What economic benefits might accrue to Canadian industry through Ottawa’s involvement? And what investment opportunities might be lost if Canada stays out?

Finally, what about the legal context? Will the US program breach international law? Is it consistent with Canada’s ongoing global commitments and obligations?

Since none of these questions can be properly answered without complete details of the rumoured US proposal, participants in the most recent version of the Canadian ballistic missile debate are running in circles.

One can therefore only hope that if, or when, a formal US offer does arrive, Ottawa provides Canadians with enough information to allow for a real debate.

Parts for Patriot missile batteries arrive in Turkey

Parts for the Patriot surface-to-air missile batteries Istanbul requested from NATO have started to arrive in Turkey. They were accompanied by 39 German technicians, who will maintain the system

­“Some parts have started coming as of this morning,” the Bloomberg quotes the Turkish Ambassador to the US Namik Tan.

However, he could not confirm which pieces have been received or when the batteries would become operational.

Diplomat Namik Tan also restated Turkey’s official position that the Patriot batteries would only be used for self-defence and with NATO oversight.

"These will be used in a situation where Turkey is attacked," the diplomat was quoted by the US News & World Report.

Tan did not mention if the batteries would fire across the Syrian border.

The diplomat added that the Turkey is currently consulting with NATO allies about where the missile installations should be located.

German advanced military personnel have also arrived in Turkey to help set up the batteries. Colonel Manfred Stange reported Tuesday that 39 staff members were heading to the south-eastern city of Kahramanmaras, about 120 kilometers (75 miles) from the Syrian border.

The full Patriot missile complex is to be installed at the beginning of 2013. The batteries will be brought to Turkey from Germany by sea.

Germany’s Bundestag gave its approval to the deployment on December 14, but it remains unknown when all 400 soldiers, involved in maintaining the Patriot system will arrive. The mission is time-limited to January 2014.

The US military will also be involved, on Friday Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta signed an order to deploy two Patriot air-defense missile batteries to Turkey along with 400 troops.

"We will start to move personnel and equipment soon. We're anticipating the US systems and personnel being in place by mid-January, if all goes as planned," a  Defense Department spokesperson explained to News and World Report.

At the beginning of December, NATO foreign ministers agreed to the deployment of six Patriot missile batteries from Germany, Netherlands and the US on the Turkish-Syrian border.

This was in response to a request for assistance from Ankara, which fears more violence could spread across the border from its war-torn neighbour, including possible use of chemical weapons.

Turkey to Iran: Stop criticizing Patriot, put pressure on the Syrian regime

The deployment of Patriot missiles has heightened tensions between Turkey and Iran, which has been supportive of the Syrian regime since the beginning of the civil unrest.

The Islamic republic lashed out at Ankara arguing the move would only further aggravate the Syrian conflict.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu replied to Tehran Tuesday that “instead of criticizing the (Patriot) system’, it should “send a clear message” to Syria’s regime.

“Iran should say ‘stop’ to the Syrian regime that has been continuously oppressing its own people and provoking Turkey through border violations,” AFP cited the official.

Over the weekend Iran’s President Ahmadinejad cancelled his visit to Turkey’s Anatolian province in protest at the NATO reinforcement of the Turkish-Syrian border.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, who was in Moscow on Tuesday discuss the Syrian conflict, reiterated his country’s support for Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Amir-Abdollahian said he did not believe Assad and his government were about to fall.

The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that the Syrian issue can be resolved by political means, he said.

Iran sees the solution in a transitional government that must be formed with the inclusion of Bashar al-Assad as the legitimate President of Syria.

Moscow fires warning shot across bow of US naval-based ABM

The guided missile cruiser USS Lake Champlain

A top Russian official says a US missile defense system near Russia’s border is strategically destabilizing and may prompt an arms race.

Speaking to SW on the threat of mobile naval-based elements of the US missile defense system  “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia."

"We must consider the effective protection of our strategic nuclear forces," Rogozin said in an interview with the magazine Voyenny Parade (‘Military Parade’).

Rogozin, while not elaborating on what Russia’s response would be, noted that Russia is taking definite steps to counter American ships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Russia has warned its US and NATO partners on numerous occasions that unless the two sides can reach an acceptable agreement over NATO plans to unilaterally build a missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, another arms race is inevitable.

Ironically, it was US President Barack Obama – the same American leader who pushed for a “reset” with Moscow – who introduced the current missile defense plans that may include stationing Aegis missiles aboard US warships in the Black Sea.

Washington says the missile defense system, which is capable of intercepting short- to intermediate-range ballistic missiles, is vital for protecting Eastern Europe from “rogue states,” like Iran and North Korea. At the same time, however, the western military alliance ignores Moscow’s concern the strategic balance may be upset. In fact, NATO even refuses to provide Moscow with written, legal guarantees that the system will not in the future target Russian territory.

Judging by Rogozin’s strong words, it seems that another arms race has already begun.

"U.S. missile defense in its current form is obviously destabilizing and prompting an arms race between Russia and the U.S. and NATO," Rogozin noted.

Russia is considering ways of “suppressing and penetrating” the missile defense system in ways that will guarantee “unacceptable damage to any aggressor, and force it to resist the temptation to test Russia's strength,” the Deputy Prime Minister added.

Rogozin, who served in a previous capacity as Russia’s NATO envoy, explained his use of blunt language.

"We must be frank about this. I was the Russian envoy to NATO for four years and I know what language they understand best of all," he said.

US seeks ‘world supremacy’ through advanced weapons - Security Chief

 A RIM-7P NATO Sea Sparrow Missile being launched from the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN 72) during a stream raid shoot exercise.

The Secretary of the Security Council of Russia has provided his views on a number of national security issues, including the importance of preserving Russia’s nuclear arsenal against potential adversaries.

­Nikolay Patrushev, commenting on how atomic weapons play more of a political role than a military one, said the consequences of even a “limited nuclear intervention” are so catastrophic that it makes the usage of such weapons absolutely impossible. 

Nuclear arsenals therefore continue to serve as an effective deterrent against any possible large-scale war, Patrushev told Komsomolskaya Pravda newspaper in an interview.

Patrushev spoke candidly on the nature and source of threats to Russian security, and what those challenges mean for the country.

“We…understand that the atomic weapons of leading western counties are aimed mainly against Russia,” he said. “In these conditions – and given the insufficient strength of Russia’s conventional armed forces – the preservation of the nuclear potential is a priority task.”

While ruling out the possibility of total nuclear disarmament, Patrushev nevertheless explained that a new generation of weapon systems – including anti-ballistic missiles – is changing the nuclear calculus.

Earlier, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin spoke on the threat mobile, naval-based elements of the US missile defense system “suddenly appearing” on Russia’s coastline. Such an event would trigger “the harshest reaction from Russia," he warned.

Rogozin said that Russia is now taking definite steps to counter US warships “equipped with the Aegis integrated naval weapons system.”

Moscow has frequently warned of “another arms race” unless a bilateral agreement is reached on NATO’s plans for missile defense near the Russian border.

Patrushev continued that theme in his interview, underlining the technological advances that have changed the face of war.

Not long ago, any state that possessed nuclear weapons was undoubtedly a “dominating force” in the international arena, he noted. However, in a clear reference to US plans for a naval-based missile defense shield in Eastern Europe, Patrushev mentioned that a new generation of weapons is being developed, and that “the United States has proven successful in this field of research.”

Patrushev explained that Russia, which has seen success in developing state-of-the-art technology, had not given enough attention to that field of research. As new weaponry appears, the US appears to be reconsidering the role of strategic nuclear arms in the fulfillment of a “geopolitical idea of world supremacy,” the security official added.

Patriot missiles in Turkey: Targeting Syria or Iran?

Soldiers of the Air Defence Missile Squadron 2 stand guard with Patriot missile launchers in the background in Bad Suelze, northern Germany on December 4, 20 

Turkey, a longtime geopolitical hotspot, has recently played a key role in the struggle for influence between regional and Western powers over NATO missile deployments – Ankara is once again at the center of a global crisis.

What prompted this new crisis (and evoked a distinct feeling of Cold War déjà vu) was Ankara’s appeal to NATO to deploy its Patriot missiles in the southern Turkish provinces, along the 900-km-long border with Syria. While described as a purely defensive move, aimed at enhancing Turkish security in the wake of the escalating Syrian war and alleged possibility of a chemical weapons attack by the cornered President Assad, the initiative was denounced straight away by Ankara’s neighbors and other regional powers – Moscow, Tehran and Damascus.

“Moscow was wary of the NATO anti-aircraft system’s deployment in Turkey,” Russian Chief of General Staff Valery Gerasimov said last week during talks with the Chair of the NATO Military Committee, Knud Bartles.

Remarks were echoed by Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Aleksandr Lukashevich, who warned last Friday that “the stockpile of extra weapons” in the border area would “bring about an additional element of tension."

However, there is little chance the Patriot deployment process on Turkish soil will be reversed. At its ministerial meeting in Brussels, held on December 5th and 6th, NATO unequivocally gave the Turkish request its stamp of approval, standing by the commitments under the organization's collective security pact. A team of NATO officials and experts has already landed in Turkey to finalize the terms and conditions of the deal, which will allow Ankara to station six NATO Patriot systems on its soil – two American, two German and two Dutch.  The missiles are expected to reach Turkey soon, within weeks according to some estimates.

One could ask: What is wrong with Turkey’s genuine wish to effectively seal off its borders from hundreds of potential threats emanating from its troubled neighbor, and take advantage of being a NATO member? Independent military experts have found NATO's official explanation of Patriots being used for defensive purposes confusing.

The Patriot system is not used against shells and rocket-propelled grenades, which eventually could be fired at Turkey from Syrian territory. Patriot missiles are used to intercept and destroy missiles as well as to shoot down aircraft. But what missiles does Syria possess that the Patriots could be used against, and why would President Assad arm these alleged missiles with deadly sarin gas (if he even possesses such chemical weapons)?

The pretext for the deployment of NATO Patriot missiles in Turkey does not appear credible. But if the real motive is not to deter Syria, why is NATO hurrying to station its anti-missile systems in the region, a part of the world already overloaded with deadly weapons? What if this move has a hidden agenda?

“Turkey has explained its request to NATO as exclusively related to its need to defend itself from a possible attack from the Syrian army. But there could be a second motivation for this actions, which is a preparation for military strike against Iran,” a Russian diplomatic source told Kommersant daily. 

If one considers the distance between the region of Patriot deployment in Turkey and the Iranian border, Moscow's worry could seem a bit far-fetched. However, Patriot missiles can easily be moved to any region in Turkey, including its eastern border with Iran. “These are mobile units that can be moved to any point in Turkey. It’s only about 500 kilometers from where the units will be located to Tebriz in Iran, where some say there are secret nuclear facilities,” Dmitry Polikanov said. Polikanov is the vice president of the Moscow-based PIR Center, an independent thinktank.

“Considering that the US wants to use Turkey as an advance missile shield, the Patriots might be stationed there forever. Turkey wanted to modernize its weapons anyway and already started taking bids for similar weapons systems. Under these circumstances, the weapons are most likely directed against Iran," Polikanov said, adding that any kind of provocation could now become a pretext for war. And the installation of NATO anti-aircraft missiles in Turkey means that Iran will no longer be able to retaliate if attacked.

Iranian armed forces chief General Hassan Firouzabadi said last Saturday that the lessons of 1962 Cuban missile crisis may return to haunt the world.

"Each one of these Patriots is a black mark on the world map, and is meant to cause a world war. They are making plans for a world war, and this is very dangerous for the future of humanity and for the future of Europe itself," General Firouzabadi warned.

The already tense relations between Ankara and Tehran have been further strained by a last-minute announcement that President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has skipped a much-awaited visit to Turkey and talks with Prime Minister Erdogan in a move largely seen as a sign of Iran's growing displeasure with the Patriot deployment.

Rail wars? Russia ponders new railroad-based missile systems

Plans are underway to create combat railway-based missile systems designed to give Russia a more flexible means of defense.

­The system consists of a train with two or three diesel locomotives and specialized railcars, which look like refrigerator or passenger railcars, but carry intercontinental ballistic missiles, together with command posts, Col. Vadim Koval, the Russian Defense Ministry's spokesman for the Strategic Rocket Forces (RVSN)the Russian Defense Ministry, told reporters.

Although the last railway-based missile unit was decommissioned almost a decade ago, the system is getting a second look as a means of protecting Russia’s vast landmass as global threats become more diversified.

"A final decision, however, has not been taken on the issue," Koval added.

The idea of using railroads to move around missiles is not new. Koval noted that the first unit of railway-based missile systems was put on combat duty in Kostroma in October 1987, and removed from service in 2005.

However, with the nature of warfare changing and the global situation increasingly volatile and unpredictable, military leaders argue it may be a good time to give some versatility to Russia’s missile defenses.

Meanwhile, Russia is looking for ways to counter the US missile defense system, which is being deployed in Eastern Europe. Despite Moscow’s warning that the technology has the potential to spark a new arms race, US and NATO officials remain adamant and refuse to cooperate with Russia. Washington has even rejected Moscow’s request to provide it with legal assurances that the system will never be activated against Russian territory.

Railway-based missile systems are designed for use along special military patrol routes, as well as railway lines used by the public.

Formerly, three missile divisions – near Kostroma, Krasnoyarsk and Perm – were deployed. Employing 12 trains, the system transported 36 missiles, each with 10 nuclear warheads.

Russian military experts say that with technological advances made in missile technology, the use of railroad-based systems could be an effective means of protecting Russia.

US missile defense: ‘global, mobile and threatening’ - Russia

NATO’s missile defense system presents a threat to Russia’s national security and may trigger the militarization of Europe, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin told a NATO Parliamentary Assembly delegation on Thursday.

"This missile defense concept is global and mobile, and it creates unpredictability,” Rogozin said at a meeting with NATO officials at the Federation Council. “That is the real Figaro; Figaro here and Figaro there."

Rogozin said Moscow is “awaiting explanations from NATO and Washington concerning the real purpose [of the system],” he stressed.

The Deputy Prime Minister remarked on the military defense components “that are being deployed around Norway, the bases in Romania,” which are aimed at intercepting “strategic rockets according to speed, range and altitude characteristics."

Rogozin then mentioned the US naval group – the core of European missile defense – which “may be deployed in European ports rather far from the Russian territory (such as a base in Spain).”

However, "the same fleet will invariably appear in our northern seas under particular circumstances."

"The radius of use of these weapons makes them a real threat to us,” Rogozin noted. “The strategic potential of Russia is a guarantee of its sovereignty and independence."

The US missile defense system, first shelved then repackaged under the Obama administration, has been a thorn in the side of the Russia-US reset. Indeed, Russia has warned that the issue has all the potential to escalate into another arms race.

If new threats to Russia's strategic potential appear, Russia will simply have to consider the threatening prospect of a militarized Europe.

Rogozin implored the NATO delegation not to push Russia into a position where it will be forced to respond.

"We request you don’t do that,” he stressed. “The Russian response has a…political and diplomatic nature at the moment, but you will not like the technical response we may have to pursue under certain circumstances."

Although the Vice Premier said Russia has no reason to fear for the security of its western borders, he acknowledged there are threats that both Russia and the European Union share alike.

"We see new threats arising in Russia and European countries and…these threats are practically identical to both you and us," Rogozin told the NATO delegation. "Russia is no an exporter of such threats to NATO states, and we can hardly reproach NATO for the presence of such threats."

Russia regards the European Union as its unconditional strategic partner and Moscow is not interested in any conflicts or controversies disrupting the bilateral partnership, he stressed.

“The 21st century should…represent the revival of Russia's full-scale presence in Europe's common political affairs, which would be of much benefit both for Russia and Europe,” he declared.

Russia tightens border with next-gen air defense system

The Russian military will deploy state-of-the-art air defense systems along its southern border by the end of the year, the Defense Ministry announced.

“In accordance with the Southern Military District’s modernization plan, the S-400 ‘Triumph’ will replace S-300PM systems on combat duty before the end of this year to protect Russian airspace,” district spokesperson Col. Igor Gorbul told Interfax-AVN on Monday.

The deployment will consist of Pantsir-S missile and artillery systems, as well as advanced radio equipment, he said.

The S-400 is a next-generation anti-aircraft weapon system capable of firing three different missile types. The system was designed to intercept and destroy jamming planes, radar planes, reconnaissance aircraft, strategic carriers, cruise missiles and medium-range ballistic missiles.

Military analysts reported that the Triumph is capable of tracking more than 100 targets simultaneously at ranges of over 600 kilometers (370 miles), and destroying up to 12 targets at varying distances.

The Almaz Central Design Bureau reported that the fifth air defense regiment will shift to the S-400 system by the end of the year.

The deployment of the S-400 to Russia’s south comes at a time of increasing tensions between Russia and NATO over the latter’s plans to build a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. The US initially pledged to cooperate with Russia on the project, but later retreated on that promise. Several Russian officials have warned that the issue could spark another arms race unless a bilateral agreement is reached.

The Triumph air defense system successfully completed launch tests conducted at the Ashuluk training range in Russia’s Astrakhan region in August.