10 juin 2022 | International, Aérospatial
Avions de chasse chinois : Trudeau parle de « provocation », Pékin se défend
Pékin accuse plutôt l'aviation militaire canadienne de mener des « opérations hostiles » dans le Pacifique.
17 décembre 2018 | International, Aérospatial, Naval, Terrestre, C4ISR, Sécurité
Finland’s defense minister: Continuity and change in Finnish defense policy
By: Jussi Niinistö
Today we are all adapting to a new security environment, both in Europe and globally. From the Finnish point of view, we can see some continuity and some new elements.
After the Cold War ended, Finland did not initiate a massive defense transformation. Even though we started to build interoperability with our NATO partners and participated in crisis management operations, the main focus of the Finnish Defence Forces was always the defense of our own territory. Our consistent policy was to keep our defense strong. The upcoming investments — including four new corvettes for the Navy and replacement of the Finnish Air Force's F-18 fleet — and new defense-related legislation will further strengthen our readiness and national defense.
What has changed in our current environment, however, is that other European Union and NATO countries have also started to focus on the defense of their own territory, and NATO's presence is the Baltic Sea region has increased. This has enhanced stability and security in the Baltic Sea region. At the same time, increased presence in our neighborhood has created more training opportunities.
Increased cooperation and coordination is also needed because of our geography and a shared security environment, which creates some interdependency. This type of defense cooperation is based on a shared, common interest.
Today, the Finnish Defence Forces are more capable and more interoperable than they have ever been. That makes us effective in looking after our own security and a solid partner for other EU member states and NATO countries.
For Finland, the European Union has always been a security provider. It is increasingly also a facilitator and enabler of defense cooperation. The union has tools that other organizations lack. The European Defence Fund or promoting military mobility in Europe are just a few examples, and only a beginning, as we are moving from out-of-area crisis management to a more strategic approach to protecting Europe and its citizens.
Although all the EU member states have agreed on the direction we are heading, some want to move faster than others. The vision for the future must bring countries together instead of sowing divisions.
The more the EU can do for defense, the better for NATO and the trans-Atlantic link. A more capable and integrated Europe is also a stronger trans-Atlantic partner. In this respect, more EU does not mean less NATO. EU and NATO must continue to coordinate their actions on both hard and soft security.
I hope this illustrates why we, in Finland, do not see European strategic autonomy as an alternative to NATO or as an alternative to a strong trans-Atlantic link.
It is also essential to mention the Nordic Defence Cooperation, which has also adapted to changes in our shared security environment. In November, the Nordic defense ministers adopted a new Vision 2025 for taking our cooperation forward. The vision states that we will improve our defense capability and cooperation in peace, crisis and conflict, and that we will ensure a close Nordic political and military dialogue on security and defense. This regional cooperation supports what we are doing in the EU and together with NATO.
During my time as the minister of defense of Finland, we have taken other steps to strengthen the trans-Atlantic link. A prime example is our bilateral defense relationship with the United States. In October 2016, we signed our bilateral statement of intent on defense cooperation. This was later followed by a trilateral statement of intent between Finland, Sweden and the United States in May 2018. The statements of intent speak to both the depth and width of our cooperation, including joint exercises, policy dialogue and materiel cooperation. In the coming years, these links will be further strengthened.
We must also keep our minds on the bigger picture. There is a dual challenge: to sustain the vital trans-Atlantic relationship and further strengthen European security. These goals can best be achieved by increasing European capabilities. Europe needs to finds its voice and speak, alongside the United States.
Jussi Niinistö is Finland's defense minister.
Sur le même sujet
-
-
4 octobre 2018 | International, Aérospatial
Indian Air Force chief defends Rafale fighter deal against claims of crony capitalism
By: Pierre Tran and Vivek Raghuvanshi NEW DELHI and PARIS — Indian Air Force chief, Air Chief Marshal Birender Singh Dhanoa defended the decision of India's ruling National Democratic Alliance to buy 36 Rafale fightersfrom France, calling it “a game changer" even as the opposition party criticizes the deal. Addressing annual news conference, Dhanoha said: "At the appropriate level, the Indian Air Force was consulted, but it is for the government to choose. It was decided to buy two squadrons through a government to-government deal, to meet up emergency requirements.” India and France signed the €7.8 billion (U.S. $8.99 billion) inter-governmental agreement Sept. 23, under which 36 Rafale fighter aircraft will be procured from Dassault Aviation for Indian Air Force (IAF) in fly away condition. France will invest 30 percent of the total contract value in India's military aeronautics-related research programs and 20 percent into local production of Rafale components to fulfil the mandatory offsets under the deal. The deliveries of Rafale fighters will start this month. India's main opposition party, Indian National Congress, has claimed on several occasions that the Rafale deal is grossly overvalued and tainted by crony capitalism. The Congress said the Modi government had failed to answer several questions on why public sector Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) had lost the manufacting deal to industrialist Anil Ambani's Reliance Defence Ltd. “The earlier deal for 126 medium multirole combat aircraft reached an impasse during negotiations," Dhanoa said,, referring to a $12 billion medium, multi-role combat aircraft program that was launchced in 2007 but scrapped 10 years later. "We had three options: wait for something good to happen, withdraw the global tender and start over again, or do an emergency purchase. We did an emergency purchase.” Dhanoa called the cost of 36 Rafale was “reasonable and adequate." The latest comments from Dhanoa come after Indian defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman called baseless congressional allegations of a reduction in the number of Rafale jets being purchased from France. Congress has demanded the government explain why instead of 126 Rafale fighter jets, only 36 are being purchased if they were cheaper under the NDA deal than the prior deal. Sitharaman is expected to hold the first annual defence ministers dialogue with her counterpart Florence Parly in Paris Oct. 12-13, as the two countries seek to expand bilateral defense and strategic ties. In France, Dassault said the company had picked Reliance as its Indian partner to meet requirements for local offset established by the Indian Defense Procurement Procedure and Make in India policy. The statement followed controversy sparked by remarks by former French president François Hollande, who said the Indian government selected Reliance as the local partner and that the company "had nothing to say on the subject, we had no choice, we took the partner which was presented.” Dassault put out its statement on the deal for 36 Rafale to India Sept, 21 statement, stating that, in accordance with the policy of Make in India, Dassault Aviation decided to make a partnership with India's Reliance Group. https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2018/10/03/indian-air-force-chief-defends-rafale-fighter-deal-against-claims-of-crony-capitalism
-
2 juin 2020 | International, Naval
Pandemic Hits Navy’s New Nuke Submarine Program
Work on the missile tubes for the Navy's part of the nation's nuclear triad is months behind schedule after Babcock was smacked hard by the pandemic. By PAUL MCLEARYon June 01, 2020 at 5:23 PM WASHINGTON: The Navy's top priority — its new nuclear-powered Columbia-class submarine — has been struck by the COVID-19 virus. Workers' absences at a critical supplier have delayed construction and welding of the boat's missile tubes by several months a senior Navy official said today, and the service is scrambling to make that time up. While the service and its contractors are looking for ways to reclaim that time, the situation is something that Navy and Pentagon officials have most feared. Large-scale work on the first of the twelve planned Columbia submarines is slated to kick off in 2021, with deliveries starting in 2030 — just in time to begin replacing the Cold War-era Ohio-class subs as the Navy's leg of the nation's nuclear triad. The subs will carry 70 percent of the warheads allowed by the New Start treaty with Russia. Head of the Columbia program, Rear Adm. Scott Pappano, said during a video conference sponsored by the Advanced Nuclear Weapons Alliance today that the work experienced “a hiccup” earlier this year when less than 30 percent of workers at UK-based Babcock Marine showed up for work during the height of the COVID outbreak, leading to setbacks in the work schedule. “There was an interruption in our ability to do work,” Pappano said, calling the delay of several months a “worst case” scenario that would stick if no actions were taken to speed up work going forward. “We're analyzing the plan right now,” he added. “Prioritizing what tubes go where and then coming up with mid-term and long-term recovery plans to go deal with that.” Pappano said the Navy and industry may hire more workers and bring in more vendors to buy that time back. The missile tubes have already caused the service some pain. In 2018, contractor BWX, contracted to deliver three tubes to Electric Boat, discovered problems before the tubes were delivered, eventually paying $27 million to fix the problems. The company later said it is considering getting out of the missile tube business with the Navy, leaving BAE Systems as the only US-based company capable of doing the work. The Navy is walking a tightrope on its Virginia and Columbia programs, and any slip on one program will affect the other. The two share the same missile tube design, which will also be fitted onto the UK's forthcoming Dreadnaught class of submarines. “One of the biggest risks to Columbia is if Virginia gets out of its cadence,” James Geurts, the Navy's acquisition chief, told reporters late last year. Once the Columbia subs begin rolling out of Electric Boat's shipyard, the Navy will have to produce one Columbia and two Virginias per year, a pace of submarine building the service has not seen in decades. But Columbia will remain the Navy's top focus. Geurts said he's structured both programs in a way that the shared supplier base is aware of what's needed well in advance, but “if not, we can back off a little to make sure Columbia is successful.” Despite the setback, Babcock's workforce has recovered in recent weeks, “and essentially they're above 90% capacity” on the production line, Pappano said. “So my assessment is they're essentially back up — or close to it — not where they were before” the virus struck. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/06/covid-19-hits-navys-newest-nuke-submarine-program/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=EBB%2006.02.20&utm_term=Editorial%20-%20Early%20Bird%20Brief