Back to news

May 28, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land, C4ISR, Security

‘Prepare to be abandoned’: China seizes on Mike Pompeo’s ‘disconnection’ comment

China's state media has issued a fresh warning for Australia, after a TV appearance by the US Secretary of State sparked a diplomatic storm.

China's state media says Australia should “be well prepared to be abandoned at any time” by the United States, after a TV appearance by the Secretary of State sparked a diplomatic storm.

The Chinese government-owned Global Times newspaper urged Australia to side with China, drawing on recent remarks from Mike Pompeo that the US could “simply disconnect” from us at any time.

“Obviously, what is on the mind of Pompeo and his likes is only US self-interests, and Washington is not going to foot the bill for the lost Australian jobs,” the article says.

“Australia is already in a passive position in the face of wavering US policy. Canberra is forced to pick a side between Beijing and the Washington even when it is loath to jeopardise its relationship with China.”

On Sunday, Mr Pompeo spoke to Sky News Australia about a proposal by the Victorian state government to work with China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

“I don't know the nature of those projects precisely, but to the extent they have an adverse impact on our ability to protect telecommunications from our private citizens, or security networks for our defence and intelligence communities, we will simply disconnect, we will simply separate,” Mr Pompeo said. “We're going to preserve trust in networks for important information. We hope our friends and partners and allies across the world, especially our Five Eyes partners like Australia, will do the same.”

The remarks raised eyebrows in Canberra, and prompted the US embassy in Australia to issue a statement making clear the US had “absolute confidence in the Australian government's ability to protect the security of its telecommunications networks and those of its Five Eyes partners”.

Based on Mr Pompeo's comments, the Global Times report said “Australia should realise that the US views it only as a lackey”.

“The possibility that the US will not come to Australia's rescue when needed is nothing new,” it said. “While the US maintains its global hegemony by running roughshod over the interests of its allies, it does not offer any rewards.”

The report concluded by accusing Prime Minister Scott Morrison of “not taking the interests of people in each state seriously”, after the PM said the federal government had never supported Victoria's involvement in the trillion-dollar project.

“Boosting employment and economic opportunities is one of the essential tasks for every government, especially local governments. As the US tries to block Victoria's BRI deal, what alternatives does the US offer?”

It's just the latest in a series of targeted messages from the Chinese government.

Yesterday, the same newspaper warned Australia to “distance” itself from the US amid growing tensions between the two countries, saying it would be “extremely dangerous” for Canberra to get involved in a “new cold war”.

“If the Trump administration plunges the world into a ‘new Cold War', forcing China to take countermeasures against the US and its allies, it would be extremely dangerous for Canberra to become a player in a diplomatic club led by the US, given Australia's high dependence on the Chinese economy,” the article said.

“Once Australia is regarded as a supporter of the US in a ‘new Cold War', China-Australia economic ties will inevitably suffer a fatal blow.

“Australia's economic deterrent force is much smaller than the US', so China to some extent will enjoy more room to fight back against Australia with countermeasures if Canberra supports Washington ... it means Australia may feel more pain than the US.”

The debate over trade has intensified as the economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic becomes more pronounced.

The US, which is closing in on 100,000 COVID-19 deaths, is trying to pin the blame squarely on the Chinese Communist Party, while Beijing says the Trump administration is trying to keep it from becoming a global power.

Meanwhile, there have been reports China is considering targeting more Australian exports, with Chinese authorities reportedly drawing up a list of potential goods including dairy, wine, seafood and fruit, which could be subject to tariffs if relations continue to sour.

https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/prepare-to-be-abandoned-china-seizes-on-mike-pompeos-disconnection-comment/news-story/36eebb8c45e9486fe0437124b2936449

On the same subject

  • Nuclear modernization speeding up as arms control on the brink: report

    June 16, 2020 | International, Aerospace, Naval, Land

    Nuclear modernization speeding up as arms control on the brink: report

    By: Aaron Mehta   WASHINGTON — Overall nuclear warheads in the world decreased in 2019, but broad modernization efforts by the biggest nuclear countries — along with a degradation of arms control agreements around the world — could mean a dangerous mix for the future, according to an annual report from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, or SIPRI. The organization estimated that at the end of 2019, nine countries possessed a total of 13,400 nuclear warheads, down from the 13,865 estimated in SIPRI's previous report, which in turn was a drop from 14,465 the year before. The reductions were primarily due to numbers dropping under the New START nuclear agreement between Russia and the U.S., which experts largely expect not to be renewed at the start of the new year. Russia is the largest holder of nuclear warheads, according to SIPRI's numbers, with 6,735 total, of which 1,570 are deployed. The U.S. follows at 5,800, with 1,750 deployed. The two countries account for over 90 percent of the world's nuclear arsenal. The United Kingdom (250 total, 120 deployed) and France (290 total, 280 deployed) are the other two nations believed to have deployed nuclear warheads. China (320 total), India (150 total), Pakistan (160 total), Israel (90 total) and North Korea, (30-40 total) round out SIPRI's list. Both the U.S. and Russia are engaged in expensive, widespread modernization efforts of its nuclear arsenal. America is upgrading both its legacy nuclear warheads with new designs, as well as updating its fleet of nuclear-capable bombers, submarines and ICBMs. Earlier this year, the Pentagon deployed for the first time the W76-2, a low-yield variant of the nuclear warhead traditionally used on the Trident submarine launched missile, and early design work is being done on another new submarine launched warhead design, known as the W93. Russia, meanwhile, has spoken openly about developing hypersonic weapons that could be nuclear equipped and has invested in novel weapons such as the Status-6, an underwater drone that could be equipped with a nuclear warhead. Moscow has also vocalized new deployment plans for its weapons and on June 2 made official a policy that it may use nuclear weapons in response to a conventional attack. Those investments by the world's two nuclear superpowers come against a backdrop of the collapse of numerous arms control agreements. 2019 saw the formal end of the Intermediate Range and Shorter Range Missiles (INF) treaty, and in May the U.S. announced its intention to withdraw from the Open Skies arms control verification agreement. The last major arms control agreement between Russia and the U.S. is New START, which is set to expire in February of 2021. In recent weeks the U.S. has announced its intention to start negotiations on a new arms control agreement that would include China. However, Chinese officials have repeatedly and categorically denied that it would be willing to join such an agreement, and experts largely view any efforts to create a trilateral nuclear arms control pact as a New START replacement are non-starters, leading to widespread agreement among analyst that New START is likely doomed under the Trump administration. “The deadlock over New START and the collapse of the 1987 Soviet–US Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate Range and Shorter Range Missiles (INF) Treaty in 2019 suggest that the era of bilateral nuclear arms control agreements between Russia and the USA might be coming to an end,” said Shannon Kile, Director of SIPRI's nuclear disarmament, arms control and non-proliferation program. “The loss of key channels of communication between Russia and the USA that were intended to promote transparency and prevent misperceptions about their respective nuclear force postures and capabilities could potentially lead to a new nuclear arms race.” https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2020/06/14/nuclear-modernization-speeding-up-as-arms-control-on-the-brink-report/

  • Here are some early adopters of the controversial JEDI cloud

    December 13, 2019 | International, C4ISR

    Here are some early adopters of the controversial JEDI cloud

    Andrew Eversden There will be 14 early adopters of the Pentagon's controversial new enterprisewide general-purpose cloud, Defense Department CIO Dana Deasy said Dec. 12. Deasy, speaking at the AFCEA NOVA Air Force IT Day, said parties eyeing a move to the Joint Enterprise Defense Infrastructure (JEDI) cloud are U.S. Transportation Command, Special Operations Command, Joint Special Operations Command and the Navy. “What's really unique is the variety of the 14 early adopters allows us to test various principles on JEDI from the tactical edge all the way to the top secret — needing to use the cross-domain,” Deasy said. “So we're going to learn fairly quickly what it takes to actually now go from the strategic vision to the ability to stand it up and to bring it to life.” Federal Times asked the Department of Defense to provide the other 10 components among the first movers. A DoD spokesperson didn't immediately respond. Deasy reiterated what he told Defense News earlier in the week: that the unclassified JEDI environment will be ready in February, with the “secret” environment ready six months after that. There is also no specific timeline for the top-secret environment. He said that there are meetings every two weeks where the JEDI team discusses the “60 to 70 services” that must be ready to go when the unclassified environment kicks off. DoD awarded the JEDI contract to Microsoft over Amazon Web Services, which recently filed a protest in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims that relied heavily on interference allegations against President Donald Trump. The contract is potentially worth $10 billion over 10 years. Throughout the entirety of the JEDI procurement, DoD has struggled to dispel the notion that the Pentagon's only cloud would be JEDI, when in reality the JEDI cloud is just one in a multicloud environment. Deasy took aim at that characterization in his address, highlighting that there are “something like” 10 more cloud contracts out for bids next year. “The whole reason we started JEDI was we were not short on clouds,” Deasy said. “What we were short of was an enterprise capability ... all the way out to the tactical edge. ... There will always be a need for special-purpose clouds." Once the JEDI cloud is set up, Deasy said, the next step is to look across the department at the various siloed cloud and ask “do they serve a unique purpose that is truly distinctly different than JEDI? Or is there overlap?” The Pentagon has signaled that it will move 80 percent of its systems to the JEDI cloud. Consolidation is an option for overlapping clouds, but Deasy said the DoD won't know what to do specifically with the overlaps until the JEDI cloud is stood up. The JEDI cloud environment will allow the DoD to significantly reduce the number of clouds it has, which the Congressional Research Services has estimated sits at more than 500. With the JEDI cloud, Deasy's ready to reduce that number by hundreds. At the end of the day, “we sure in the heck don't need 100 clouds, we probably don't need 50 clouds, but we definitely need more than one or two clouds,” Deasy said. https://www.federaltimes.com/it-networks/cloud/2019/12/12/here-are-some-early-adopters-of-the-controversial-jedi-cloud/

  • Northrop Grumman touts Fire Scout UAS for shipborne ASW

    February 5, 2021 | International, Aerospace

    Northrop Grumman touts Fire Scout UAS for shipborne ASW

    by Gareth Jennings Northrop Grumman is touting its MQ-8C Fire Scout unmanned aircraft system (UAS) as a future ship-based anti-submarine warfare (ASW) platform, with a recent trial off the coast of California demonstrating the concept. Speaking to Janes on 4 February, Dan Redman, Fire Scout maritime mission expansion lead at Northrop Grumman, said that the MQ-8C currently serving with the US Navy (USN) would make for a ready-made ASW solution in both its lift capacity and endurance, as shown by an October 2020 trial using a surrogate manned Bell 407 helicopter off San Clemente Island. “The GIUK [Greenland, Iceland, and UK] Gap, Westpac [western Pacific], declining budgets, and ageing aircraft fleets have all been catalysts at Northrop Grumman to put our heads together to see what more missions our two navy unmanned platforms could accomplish,” Redman said. “With the [MH-60R and P-8A Poseidon] manned counterparts to the Fire Scout and Triton both doing ASW, it made sense.” Redman explained that for some years Northrop Grumman has been working alongside UK company Ultra in developing an ASW capability for the Fire Scout, culminating in the demonstration. “Ultra makes about 90% of all the sonobuoys used in the West. They make the G-sized sonobuoy, which is about half the size of the A sonobuoy [as carried by the Poseidon maritime multimission aircraft] and a miniaturised sonobuoy receiver,” Redman said. https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/northrop-grumman-touts-fire-scout-uas-for-shipborne-asw

All news