February 1, 2024 | International, Aerospace
Guardian’s NASA mission lands a first for Space Force
The Crew-9 mission is part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, designed to shuttle workers to and from the International Space Station.
December 9, 2019 | International, Other Defence
President Donald Trump appears to be getting his wish that U.S. allies pay more for their own defense, which begs the question: Is the victory worth the cost?
Pushing allies to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense is not a new concept. Trump's predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama both argued for greater burden sharing, and Russia's 2014 invasion of Ukraine's Crimea region had allies starting to move toward that benchmark. Arguably, Trump's “America First” drumbeat is getting NATO allies to pay a bigger share of the cost of their defense three decades after the end of the Cold War. Military spending by European NATO nations and Canada has risen 4.6% this year, and the majority of allies have plans to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense by 2024, according to NATO General Secretary Jens Stoltenberg.
Meanwhile, the U.S. is on a path to dial back its contribution from 22% of NATO's total funding to 16%. “This is a direct result of President Trump making clear our expectations that these Europeans would step up to help secure their own people,” says U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
Unfortunately, Trump has not stopped there, openly expressing disdain for an organization established to guard against the kind of territorial expansion undertaken by the former Soviet Union. He has hurled sophomoric barbs at steadfast allies such as the UK, Germany and Canada, while refusing to criticize Russian strongman Vladimir Putin, the architect of both the Crimea invasion and Moscow's campaign to interfere in U.S. elections. For the first phase of the Trump presidency, his cabinet tried to temper those go-it-alone impulses. Then-Defense Secretary James Mattis sought to reassure allies of U.S. support for their security. But more recent White House appointees have been less willing to cross their boss.
Even more damaging was Trump's abrupt decision to withdraw most U.S. forces from Syria, disgracefully abandoning America's Kurdish allies to the benefit of Turkey, Russia and Iran and leaving Europe more exposed to attacks from Islamic extremists. “What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO,” French President Emmanuel Macron told The Economist. Trump sees NATO in a transactional way, “as a project in which the United States acts as a sort of geopolitical umbrella, but the trade-off is that there has to be commercial exclusivity,” he added. “It's an arrangement for buying American.”
While Macron is calling for a reconsideration of what NATO means in light of reduced American commitment, European nations are not waiting. They are building up their own defense industrial base. In 2017, the EU created the Permanent Structured Cooperation initiative, which is pursuing research toward new missiles, aircraft, missile defense and electronic attack capabilities. U.S. efforts to have its companies included in the work have so far been brushed off.
Trump's hardball approach also is being applied to key allies in Asia that have long served as a bulwark against a rising China. The U.S. alliance with South Korea is now reviewed annually, instead of every four years. And after signing a deal in February that calls for South Korea to pay nearly $1 billion to maintain the U.S. military presence there, Washington is now demanding that Seoul pay $4.7 billion annually. Before an agreement was reached, the U.S. walked out of the talks. The Trump administration also is looking for more cash from Japan, calling for more than triple Tokyo's $1.7 billion contribution toward hosting U.S. troops in its country.
These requests are straining longstanding alliances. South Korea is edging closer to China, while Japan, which has a strong industrial base, might partner with the UK on its Tempest fighter program.
To be sure, U.S. defense exports remain near an all-time high. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced $55.4 billion in potential Foreign Military Sales in fiscal 2019, about the same as the prior year. But there are indications that Trump's pay-up-now methods may lead to an erosion in future sales.
Asking allies to contribute more for their own defense certainly has merit, but the wider risks to U.S. global interests cannot be ignored. Can 70-year-old alliances survive if the leading partner vocally questions their value? And if the alliances crack, what would that mean for the U.S. military industrial base?
“The more our alliances fray,” says Eric Edelman, a former U.S. undersecretary of defense, “the less interest people have in buying U.S. defense goods and services.”
https://aviationweek.com/defense/opinion-pressuring-allies-pay-more-defense-worth-cost
February 1, 2024 | International, Aerospace
The Crew-9 mission is part of NASA’s Commercial Crew Program, designed to shuttle workers to and from the International Space Station.
June 12, 2018 | International, Naval
The littoral combat ship program continues to push ships to the fleet as the program begins to wind down ahead of the Navy's planned transition to a future frigate. In Marinette, Wisconsin, Lockheed and Fincantieri's latest mono-hull LCS, the Sioux City, completed acceptance trials in Lake Michigan, according to May 31 announcement. That ship is preparing to commission in Annapolis, Maryland, in the Fall after some weather and mechanical delays pushed back trials. The Sioux City is the sixth mono-hull LCS. Austal USA in Mobile, Alabama, in May delivered its eighth trimaran LCS, the Tulsa, and the second LCS delivered by the yard this year. The first one, the Manchester, was commissioned May 26. Both yards are still churning on a backlog of LCS. The ships will be coming fast and furious over the next couple of years as Austal, Lockheed and Fincantieri all pursue strategies to secure the contract to build the Navy's future frigate, known as FFG(X). At Marinette, the yard has seven other ships in production as well as one in long-lead procurement. Austal is working on five other LCS and the last three expeditionary fast transport ships of the 12 ordered. Between the two shipyards, there are no fewer than three proposals for the FFG(X). Fincantieri is pushing hard to make FREMM the Navy's next frigate, which would likely be built at Marinette. You can read all about the FREMM below: Lockheed is also likely eyeing Marinette for its proposal for FFG(X), a variant of the Freedom mono-hull LCS, for which it is the prime contractor. Austal is likewise proposing a variant of its trimaran LCS and the stakes for that shipyard are especially high since it is coming to the end of both its programs. Lockheed and Fincantieri are anticipating an order of a Freedom LCS variant multi-mission surface combatant for Saudi Arabia's naval recapitalization. All three of the contractors are among five competing for the FFG(X) contract. Navantia and Huntington Ingalls are the other two. https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2018/06/11/lockheed-austal-usa-serve-up-new-batch-of-lcs-amid-frigate-competition/
December 28, 2023 | International, Security