Back to news

October 18, 2021 | International, Aerospace

Philippine Air Force Receives US ScanEagle Drones, More Black Hawks

The Philippine Air Force this week took delivery of ScanEagle drones from the US and additional S-70i Black Hawk helicopters from a Polish defense firm.

https://www.thedefensepost.com/2021/10/15/philippines-scaneagle-drones-black-hawks

On the same subject

  • Lithuania’s defense minister: It will be a good year for NATO

    December 17, 2018 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

    Lithuania’s defense minister: It will be a good year for NATO

    By: Raimundas Karoblis The end of the year is a traditional time to pause for reflection and take a moment to look ahead. Especially so, if the upcoming year brings an important milestone, like the 70th anniversary of the North Atlantic Alliance. From the outside, it may seem that NATO is approaching the year 2019 quite perplexed, if not embattled. The important decisions of the NATO Brussels Summit were overshadowed by acrimonious public exchanges among the allies on the highly sensitive issue of burden-sharing. Moreover, the recent initiatives on European defense — in particular, all the talk about a “European army” — are perceived by many as highly divisive and damaging to the very foundations of NATO. However, to paraphrase a famous saying, the rumors of the imminent death of the alliance seem to be greatly exaggerated. The burden-sharing drama at the NATO Brussels Summit has obscured the vitally important decisions that were taken there to prepare the alliance for the post-2014 security environment. Whereas the earlier NATO summits in Wales and Warsaw focused on quick-impact deterrence measures to support the most vulnerable allies, the Brussels Summit marks the start of a systemic NATO adaptation to the conventional threat posed by Russia (as well as to the threats emanating from the south). This adaptation will take many years to complete, but its impact will be durable and profound. In the course of 2019 we will see the key elements of NATO's long-term adaptation process taking shape. In February, NATO will start systemic implementation of a reinforcement strategy, which will be a major step in carrying out the Readiness Initiative, better known as the Four Thirties. The initiative aims at providing the alliance with more high-readiness forces — a crucial aspect in today's security context. Furthermore, we will be making significant advances with the NATO Command Structure update and upgrade. Work will continue in setting up the new Cyberspace Operations Centre in Belgium to provide situational awareness and coordination of operational activity within cyberspace — a capacity that is long overdue in the alliance. Next year, the Joint Support and Enabling Command in Germany will achieve its initial operational capability to ensure rapid movement of troops and equipment into and across Europe, which has become one of the most pressing operational needs. All of these steps will make us more fit to plan and execute operations in today's demanding security environment. A significantly improved financial background is another major reason to approach the new year optimistically. In fact, if there is any drama in the NATO context, it is the dramatically increased defense budgets across the alliance. Last year we witnessed the most substantial growth in defense spending since the end of the Cold War, and 2019 will continue to mark further progress in this area, with the majority of the allies nearing the fulfillment of their commitment to reach 2 percent of their gross domestic product by 2024. Two eastern flank allies — Lithuania and Poland — have committed to moving well-beyond this number, striving to raise their defense spending to 2.5 percent of the GDP by 2030. We should be soon starting to see how the additional investments translate into more and better capabilities for the alliance. We are also approaching 2019 after a year of passionate discussions on European defense and the ways to organize it. There are voices putting forward ideas on how the European Union should strengthen its “strategic autonomy” and make sure it is able to ensure security independently. The launch of the Permanent Structured Cooperation and other European initiatives are sometimes interpreted across the Atlantic as an attempt to build an alternative to the alliance. We find such fears ungrounded. Europe's own defense efforts notwithstanding, NATO is bound to remain an irreplaceable pillar of collective defense on the European continent. It is the sole organization that can provide truly credible deterrence and defense for its members. As keen supporters of NATO-EU cooperation, we are very pleased to have witnessed the recent expansion of this cooperation into new areas. This cooperation has acquired additional importance with the finish line of Brexit just around the corner. While leaving the EU, the United Kingdom will remain in Europe, with every significant defense problem in and around the continent still affecting it. The U.K. has already assumed an immense role within NATO in addressing them, and the country has continuously indicated that its commitment to the alliance will be even stronger following Brexit. In welcoming a new year and a new chapter of its history, NATO is not doing it perplexed. The alliance is turning a new leaf, is proud of its achievements and with confidence is looking toward the future. For this reason, I am sure that 2019 is going to be a great year for the alliance. Raimundas Karoblis is the defense minister of Lithuania. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2018/12/10/lithuanias-defense-minister-it-will-be-a-good-year-for-nato/

  • Lockheed plans to pitch air defense laser weapon in future Army competition

    October 13, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Lockheed plans to pitch air defense laser weapon in future Army competition

    Taking its experience from other laser weapons programs, the company is scaling its laser technology into what it's calling DEIMOS.

  • To maintain tech edge, US seeks export controls on AI

    November 21, 2018 | International, C4ISR

    To maintain tech edge, US seeks export controls on AI

    By: Kelsey D. Atherton In just two words, the phrase “artificial intelligence” captures a deep techno-utopian promise, the notion that through craftsmanship humans can create learning and thinking machines outside the processes of organic life. AI is typically the realm of technologists and science fiction writers. Now it is also in the world of export controls prohibitions and restrictions on technologies as overseen by the Department of Commerce. In a proposed rule announced Nov. 19, the Bureau of Industry and Security wants to set out guidelines establishing “criteria for identifying emerging technologies that are essential to U.S. national security.” The stated goals of such controls are tied to both security and protectionism for existing American industry, especially the science, technology, engineering and manufacturing sectors. The proposed rules encompass 14 technologies, covering brain-computer interfaces to advanced surveillance technology. Nestled in that list of technologies is “artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning technology,” which is further broken into 11 related tools. Here is a list of all the kinds of AI that the new rules seek to put under Commerce export controls: Neural networks and deep learning (e.g., brain modelling, time series prediction, classification) Evolution and genetic computation (e.g., genetic algorithms, genetic programming) Reinforcement learning Computer vision (e.g., object recognition, image understanding) Expert systems (e.g., decision support systems, teaching systems) Speech and audio processing (e.g., speech recognition and production) Natural language processing ( e.g., machine translation) Planning (e.g., scheduling, game playing) Audio and video manipulation technologies (e.g., voice cloning, deepfakes) AI cloud technologies AI chipsets Several of these are as much mathematical concepts, or processes, as they are distinct, controllable technologies. Others, like AI cloud technologies, suggest always-online servers, which by the very nature of the internet, are difficult to control within borders. Tackling an entire technological field, especially one with as low a barrier to entry as coding, is a tricky proposition, even in the instances where the technology is clearly defined. Why might the White House go through all this trouble? “These revisions could compose an important element of a strategy of targeted countermeasures against the near-term threat posed by China's tactics for tech transfer and the long-term challenge of China's emergence as a powerhouse in innovation,” said Elsa B. Kania, adjunct fellow at the Center for New American Security. “However, the revision of this traditional mechanism for today's challenges is inherently challenging, particularly when development is driven by commercial technologies.” Unlike, say, controlling the components and designs of missiles in the Cold War, many of the technologies covered under these proposed rules have both commercial and military applications. We need not look abroad to find this. Project Maven, the tool Google created to process images collected from drones, was built on top of an open-source library. Identifying objects in images is hardly a military-specific task. Should companies within the United States be restricted in how they create, sell and share those same tools with researchers and commercial companies outside American borders? “China's national strategy of military-civil fusion, which seeks to create and leverage synergies among defense, academic, and commercial technological developments in dual-use technologies, increases the ambiguity and uncertainty of tech transfer and collaboration,” Kania said. “That is, the boundaries between defense and commercial technologies can become quite blurred as a result of the nature of these technologies and the Chinese government's strategy for their integrated development.” Putting in place controls to hinder the free flow of AI between American companies and businesses abroad may mitigate that risk somewhat, but countries set on acquiring the tools can pursue research by other means, including technology transfers, espionage, theft through hacking, or even straightforward investment and acquisition. Staying ahead in artificial intelligence likely cannot be done through commerce restrictions alone. “The U.S. must recognize that such controls may slow and hinder China's advances in these emerging technologies, but China's emergence as a powerhouse and would-be superpower in such emerging technologies will remain a critical long-term challenge,” Kania said. “We must not only pursue such defensive countermeasures, but also undertake a more offensive approach to ensuring future American competitiveness through investing in our own innovation ecosystem.” https://www.c4isrnet.com/it-networks/2018/11/20/to-maintain-tech-edge-us-seeks-export-controls-on-ai

All news