July 14, 2023 | International, C4ISR
Senators eye electronic warfare capability demonstration in western US
Sen. Mark Kelly, an Arizona Democrat, said the interstate demonstration would "better replicate some real-world threat conditions."
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.
On the same subject
-
-
December 11, 2019 | International, Land
Analysis: NATO's defence budget formula is flawed — and Canada isn't going to meet its target
Trump is angry that a number of NATO nations haven't met an agreement, reached five years ago, to spend two per cent of their annual Gross Domestic Product on defence DAVID PUGLIESE, OTTAWA CITIZEN Another NATO summit brings another chance for U.S. President Donald Trump to browbeat America's allies for not spending enough on defence. Trump is angry that a number of NATO nations haven't met an agreement, reached five years ago, to spend two per cent of their annual Gross Domestic Product on defence. But that GDP yardstick has been rendered almost meaningless this year as the tiny nation of Bulgaria has joined the U.S. super power as being one of NATO's top military spenders. Bulgaria's GDP is so small that by purchasing eight F-16 fighter jets in a one-time outlay of $1.5 billion, the country will now be spending 3.25 per cent of its economic output on its military. Only the U.S., which spends 3.4 per cent of GDP on defence, is higher. Using the GDP measurement means that Estonia, which has one of the smallest navies in the world with four ships, has reached the NATO gold standard of two per cent. Canada, which spends more than 20 times the amount in actual dollars on its military, is viewed as a NATO deadbeat. For that reason, both Conservative and Liberal governments have pushed back on the GDP measurement, which was agreed to by NATO nations at a summit in Wales in 2014. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, arguably the most supportive leader of the Canadian military that the country had seen in decades, dismissed the notion of reaching that two per cent target, even though Canada signed on to the goal. At the Wales summit, Harper's staff pointed out that reaching the two per cent mark would have required the military's budget to almost double, something that was not fiscally or politically possible. Harper himself had come under fire from defence analysts who pointed out that under his government, the percentage of GDP spent on defence reached almost an all-time low of around 1 per cent. But Harper countered that it's the amount of actual spending and capability of a country's military that matters, not the GDP measurement. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was essentially using the same argument Tuesday when he met with Trump at the NATO summit. “I think it's important to look at what is actually being done,” with defence dollars, Trudeau said. Canada only spends about 1.3 per cent of GDP on defence. But tabulate the defence dollars actually being spent on the military and Canada ranks an impressive sixth among the 29 NATO nations. The Liberal government's defence policy has promised even more money in the future. Military spending is set to increase from the current $21.8 billion to $32.7 billion in 2026-2027. Trudeau also noted in his meeting with Trump on Tuesday the key role Canada is playing in NATO operations in both Latvia and Iraq. Germany has taken a similar approach to the one used by Canada's Conservative and Liberal governments. It believes the amount of money actually being spent on military forces is more important than measuring it as a percentage of the GDP. Germany has also pointed out it is the second largest provider of troops for NATO operations. Trump is expected to once again criticize Germany for its level of defence spending. But the country does not seem to be in a hurry to make the two per cent goal. Germany currently spends about 1.4 per cent or around $64 billion annually. Earlier this year it told NATO it would reach 1.5 per cent of GDP by 2024. The other issue facing the Department of National Defence and the Canadian Forces related to the two per cent goal is one of capacity. Even if the defence budget was boosted to meet two per cent, the department simply doesn't have the ability to spend that amount of money. Around half the defence budget is for salaries and while the senior military leadership would welcome an increase in the ranks the problem they face is that young Canadians aren't exactly rushing out to join the forces. The military could spend more money on acquiring additional equipment. But a lack of trained procurement staff has been an obstacle standing in the way of even getting approved programs underway. Trudeau's explanation Tuesday about Canada's military spending being on a steady increase seemed to placate Trump, at least for now. The U.S. president responded that he views Canada as “slightly delinquent” when it comes to defence spending. “But they'll be okay,” he told journalists. “I have confidence. They'll get there quickly, I think.” https://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/defence-watch/analysis-natos-defence-budget-formula-is-flawed-and-canada-isnt-going-to-meet-its-target
-
July 28, 2020 | International, Aerospace
US eases military UAS export rules
By Harry Lye The US has eased rules governing the export of military unmanned aerial systems (UAS) making it easier for it to sell UAS internationally. Under the new rules, announced by US State Department Assistant Secretary for Political-Military Affairs René Clarke Cooper, UAS that fly under 800kph (497mph) will no longer be subject to “presumption of denial” that made approving their sale more difficult. The change affects the US's implementation of the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR). Under the new rules, possible UAS sales will be vetted using rules already in place for other exports. Commenting on the change during a telebriefing, Cooper said: “All proposed transfers affected by this change will continue to be subject to the same rigorous review criteria that we have outlined in our UAS Export Policy, our Conventional Arms Transfer Policy, and of course, the Arms Export Control Act, as well as the specific non-proliferation criteria that has been identified in the MTCR Guidelines. “The United States is going to continue conducting our robust review procedures for exporting UAS technology to support global non-proliferation objectives, and we encourage members of the MTCR, as well as non-members such as China, to do the same.” The new rule change applies to UAS but will not affect systems such as cruise missiles, hypersonic aerial vehicles and ‘advanced unmanned aerial combat vehicles'. Cooper added that the subset of UAS covered by the new regulations ‘poses no risk for weapons of mass destruction delivery'. Commenting on the move in a statement the White House said: “While the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is critical in slowing proliferation and promoting peace and security, it is in dire need of modernization as it applies to UAS. In a sector of rapidly-evolving technology, the MTCR's standards are more than three decades old. “Not only do these outdated standards give an unfair advantage to countries outside of the MTCR and hurt United States industry, they also hinder our deterrence capability abroad by handicapping our partners and allies with subpar technology. More than two years of discussion with MTCR partners were unable to produce consensus on this overdue reform.” The White House added that the move would bolster US National Security “by improving the capabilities of our partners and increase our economic security by opening the expanding UAS market to United States industry,” adding that it saw the decision as an example for other MTCR members to follow. https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/us-eases-military-uas-export-rules/