Sunday, June 3, 2012

BAE To Close Last U.K. Armored Vehicle Production Site

LONDON — BAE Systems will close its last armored fighting vehicle production site in the U.K. once a contract to build combat engineering machines is completed at the end of next year. Jobs in the munitions sector are also being axed.

The Newcastle-upon-Tyne site being closed by BAE built the world’s first production standard tanks in World War I and has produced guns and other weapons since 1847. At its height, it employed 44,000 people.

Up to 330 people could lose their jobs as the production site in northeast England is closed once the current contract to build 60 Terrier combat engineering vehicles for the British Army is completed at the end of 2013.

BAE said a business review concluded there was no prospect of new manufacturing work in the U.K. once Terrier construction ends. The decision leaves Sweden as BAE’s only European vehicles building site.

The British Ministry of Defence recently revealed its 5.5 billion pound ($8.6 billion), 10-year spending plans for the armored vehicles sector which showed there were no new major construction programs scheduled beyond those already awarded.

Much of the spending will go to upgrade existing vehicles, such as the 1 billion pound Warrior infantry fighting vehicle upgrade being undertaken by Lockheed Martin UK and an upgrade of the Challenger main battle tank.

Even supposed priority programs, such as the fielding by the British Army of General Dynamics UK’s new ASCOD SV scout vehicle, is likely to be pushed back five years to 2020.

Under present plans, the ASCOD SV machines would be partially built in Spain and completed by the state-owned Defence Support Group.

Under the policy of the Conservative-led coalition administration and the previous Labour government, armored vehicles are not a strategic sector. The ability to maintain and upgrade vehicles is a requirement but their manufacture in the U.K. is not.

A BAE spokesman said the company wanted to retain some of the heavy engineering specialists in the Newcastle area to support vehicles like the Challenger and its Titan and Trojan support variants.

The company is consolidating it armored vehicle support work at a site in Telford, in central England.

A further 280 people will lose jobs at BAE munition plants at Radway Green near Crewe, Washington in northeast England and Glascoed in South Wales. The company blamed the munitions jobs cuts on efficiency improvements and declining volumes of ammunition being purchased by the British Ministry of Defence.

The land systems cuts are the latest in a string of job losses across various sectors of BAE’s business in the U.K. over the past few years.


By ANDREW CHUTER

India’s New Army Chief Takes Command

NEW DELHI — Gen. Bikram Singh became the new chief of the Indian Army succeeding the controversial Gen. V.K. Singh.

Bikram Singh, 59, takes charge of the Army’s 1.3 million troops at a time when relations between India’s civil and military establishments are at an ebb. His predecessor was vocal in his criticism of the Defence Ministry’s slow pace of weapons and equipment procurement, and had even made accusations of corruption in the procurement process.

One of Bikram Singh’s biggest challenges will be to raise the morale of the Army, which has taken a hit during the last two years following the running vocal battle between Gen. V.K. Singh and the Defence Ministry, an Army official said.

Another challenge before the new chief will be to strengthen the service’s combat abilities on the eastern front, as the perception of a threat from China has increased, the official said.

Bikram Singh, an infantry officer, was commander of the Army’s Eastern Command, which focuses on China.

The Indian Army proposes to raise about 30,000 new troops to be stationed along the eastern front near the India-China border.


May. 31, 2012 - 11:36AM |
By VIVEK RAGHUVANSHI

Pakistan Missile Test Underscores Need for Deterrence

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s recent test of a short-range surface-to-surface missile was aimed at strengthening its conventional deterrence and complicating Indian war planning, experts said.

The May 29 test of the HATF-IX/Vengeance-IX NASR Short Range Surface-to-Surface Multi Tube Missile system was witnessed by retired Lt. Gen. Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, director-general, Strategic Plans Division, who said the test would “consolidate Pakistan’s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.”

An image from the military’s Inter Service Public Relations showed the NASR missile system to be armed with four missiles. When it was first revealed in 2011 it was comprised of only two box launchers fitted to the back of the Chinese-origin TEL vehicle.

Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer in the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies at Quaid-e-Azam University where he specializes in Pakistan’s non-conventional program and associated delivery systems, says the NASR “is designed for counterforce targets.

“In this respect, it symbolizes Pakistan’s resolve to develop nuclear weapons and delivery systems for use at the substrategic level, designed to deter India from exploiting Pakistan’s nuclear thresholds and attempting limited war or pro-active military operations,” he said.

NASR was “particularly aimed to augment Pakistan’s conventional deterrence at the tactical level for eventual employment in case of collapse of conventional defenses on any vulnerable theater of operations,” he said, and signified “Pakistan is developing miniaturized warheads of appropriate counter-force yields.”

Because the test was carried out using a new four-round box launcher layout, Ahmed said NASR will probably be used to “salvo-launch low-yield nuclear weapons on an incoming enemy armored column that breaks through the conventional defenses.”

Former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad, Brian Cloughley, said the test highlights the similarities between the NASR and a similar Chinese system, the WS-2.

“It and Hatf IX appear very similar, although, of course, I don’t know the scale of the pictures. Both TELs are 6x6 and although WS-2 has six tubes, and Nasr four, the systems are remarkably alike, and I consider that at the very least there has been cooperation between the PRC and Pakistan, to their mutual benefit, as always,” he said.

Regardless, Cloughley believes it to be a significant weapon in Pakistan’s arsenal.

“When it enters service as a nuclear-capable [surface-to-surface missile] system it will be a significant battlefield player that India cannot afford to ignore,” he said.

Cloughley served as a reconnaissance and survey officer in an MGR-1 “Honest John” rocket regiment in the British Army, a weapon he remembers as having a very long preparation time because the warhead was de-mated. In this area, he rates NASR highly.

“It seems a most flexible system that probably has a very short preparation time, and it can be assumed that the rockets come ready-mated,” he said.

But such weapons are escalatory by nature, he said.

“Tactical nuclear weapons are a force multiplier of great importance, but they also raise the stakes enormously, because once they are employed there is no guarantee that the use of nuclear weapons could be confined to the battlefield. The risk of all-out nuclear war rises accordingly,” he said.

He would therefore like to know more about the doctrine, as he concedes would the Indians.

Analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said keeping the NASR solely as a non-conventional system is somewhat wasteful.

NASR “should also be equipped with conventional warheads and be used against forward bases and troop concentrations as just keeping such a system for nuclear delivery alone is not going to be cost-effective, and considering our economy, we need to have a Swiss Army-knife like mentality, in which one system should be used for multiple things.”

He also has doubts about the stated 60-kilometer range of the NASR.

“I think it is more than that. They are very much understating it,” he said.

Ahmed, however, believes it to be symbiotically linked with Pakistan’s nuclear, specifically its plutonium, program. This is especially so in light of recent reports by the Institute for Science and International Security that work on its fourth plutonium enrichment reactor at Khushab was proceeding at a faster pace than had been the case with the previous reactors.

“Coupled with the recent reports of the fourth plutonium production reactor at the Khushab Nuclear Complex being half-way to completion, the NASR test demonstrates that Pakistan is serious in providing plutonium and tritium for its evolving force goals and meeting the requirements of substrategic nuclear weapons”, he said.

Adding, “This ought to be seen in the context of Pakistan’s desire to offset the acutely exacerbating conventional military imbalance with India and potential for India to develop or deploy its own substrategic nuclear weapons.”


Jun. 1, 2012 - 06:59AM |
By Usman Ansari.

Pakistan Missile Test Underscores Need for Deterrence

ISLAMABAD — Pakistan’s recent test of a short-range surface-to-surface missile was aimed at strengthening its conventional deterrence and complicating Indian war planning, experts said.

The May 29 test of the HATF-IX/Vengeance-IX NASR Short Range Surface-to-Surface Multi Tube Missile system was witnessed by retired Lt. Gen. Khalid Ahmed Kidwai, director-general, Strategic Plans Division, who said the test would “consolidate Pakistan’s deterrence capability at all levels of the threat spectrum, thereby ensuring peace in the region.”

An image from the military’s Inter Service Public Relations showed the NASR missile system to be armed with four missiles. When it was first revealed in 2011 it was comprised of only two box launchers fitted to the back of the Chinese-origin TEL vehicle.

Mansoor Ahmed, lecturer in the Department of Defence and Strategic Studies at Quaid-e-Azam University where he specializes in Pakistan’s non-conventional program and associated delivery systems, says the NASR “is designed for counterforce targets.

“In this respect, it symbolizes Pakistan’s resolve to develop nuclear weapons and delivery systems for use at the substrategic level, designed to deter India from exploiting Pakistan’s nuclear thresholds and attempting limited war or pro-active military operations,” he said.

NASR was “particularly aimed to augment Pakistan’s conventional deterrence at the tactical level for eventual employment in case of collapse of conventional defenses on any vulnerable theater of operations,” he said, and signified “Pakistan is developing miniaturized warheads of appropriate counter-force yields.”

Because the test was carried out using a new four-round box launcher layout, Ahmed said NASR will probably be used to “salvo-launch low-yield nuclear weapons on an incoming enemy armored column that breaks through the conventional defenses.”

Former Australian defense attaché to Islamabad, Brian Cloughley, said the test highlights the similarities between the NASR and a similar Chinese system, the WS-2.

“It and Hatf IX appear very similar, although, of course, I don’t know the scale of the pictures. Both TELs are 6x6 and although WS-2 has six tubes, and Nasr four, the systems are remarkably alike, and I consider that at the very least there has been cooperation between the PRC and Pakistan, to their mutual benefit, as always,” he said.

Regardless, Cloughley believes it to be a significant weapon in Pakistan’s arsenal.

“When it enters service as a nuclear-capable [surface-to-surface missile] system it will be a significant battlefield player that India cannot afford to ignore,” he said.

Cloughley served as a reconnaissance and survey officer in an MGR-1 “Honest John” rocket regiment in the British Army, a weapon he remembers as having a very long preparation time because the warhead was de-mated. In this area, he rates NASR highly.

“It seems a most flexible system that probably has a very short preparation time, and it can be assumed that the rockets come ready-mated,” he said.

But such weapons are escalatory by nature, he said.

“Tactical nuclear weapons are a force multiplier of great importance, but they also raise the stakes enormously, because once they are employed there is no guarantee that the use of nuclear weapons could be confined to the battlefield. The risk of all-out nuclear war rises accordingly,” he said.

He would therefore like to know more about the doctrine, as he concedes would the Indians.

Analyst Usman Shabbir of the Pakistan Military Consortium think tank said keeping the NASR solely as a non-conventional system is somewhat wasteful.

NASR “should also be equipped with conventional warheads and be used against forward bases and troop concentrations as just keeping such a system for nuclear delivery alone is not going to be cost-effective, and considering our economy, we need to have a Swiss Army-knife like mentality, in which one system should be used for multiple things.”

He also has doubts about the stated 60-kilometer range of the NASR.

“I think it is more than that. They are very much understating it,” he said.

Ahmed, however, believes it to be symbiotically linked with Pakistan’s nuclear, specifically its plutonium, program. This is especially so in light of recent reports by the Institute for Science and International Security that work on its fourth plutonium enrichment reactor at Khushab was proceeding at a faster pace than had been the case with the previous reactors.

“Coupled with the recent reports of the fourth plutonium production reactor at the Khushab Nuclear Complex being half-way to completion, the NASR test demonstrates that Pakistan is serious in providing plutonium and tritium for its evolving force goals and meeting the requirements of substrategic nuclear weapons”, he said.

Adding, “This ought to be seen in the context of Pakistan’s desire to offset the acutely exacerbating conventional military imbalance with India and potential for India to develop or deploy its own substrategic nuclear weapons.”


Jun. 1, 2012 - 06:59AM |
By Usman Ansari.

Pentagon Looks to Expand Military Relationship With Vietnam

U.S. naval ship access into Cam Ranh Bay “is a key component of this relationship and we see a tremendous potential here for the future,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said during a June 3 visit to the dry cargo ship Richard Byrd, which is making a port call here.
U.S. naval ship access into Cam Ranh Bay “is a key component of this relationship and we see a tremendous potential here for the future,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said during a June 3 visit to the dry cargo ship Richard Byrd, which is making a port call here. (Marcus Weisgerber / Staff)

CAM RANH BAY, Vietnam — The U.S. Defense Department hopes to gain greater access for Navy ships into a key port here as the Pentagon looks to broaden its military partnership with Vietnam.

U.S. naval ship access into Cam Ranh Bay “is a key component of this relationship and we see a tremendous potential here for the future,” Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said during a June 3 visit to the dry cargo ship Richard Byrd, which is making a port call here.

Panetta is the highest-ranking U.S. government official to visit Cam Ranh Bay since the Vietnam War. President Lyndon Johnson visited Cam Ranh Bay in 1966.

Many considered Cam Ranh Bay “the jewel of deep, warm-water ports in Southeast Asia,” a defense official said. Protected by mountains, the bay served as a hub for U.S. military operations during the Vietnam War.

Now, Vietnam is trying to develop the bay into a prosperous international commercial port.

The Navy has been sending ships to Vietnam for port visits since 2003, the defense official said. Since then, more than 20 vessels have made visits to the country.

Access to Vietnamese ports is just one component of an expanding military relationship between Washington and Hanoi.

“We’ve come a long way, particularly with regards to our defense relationship,” Panetta said. “We had a complicated relationship, but we’re not bound by that history.”

Last year, the two countries signed a memorandum of understanding, and the United States is looking to “expand that relationship” in a number of key areas, Panetta said.

The pact focuses on high-level exchanges, maritime activities, search and rescue, peacekeeping operations and humanitarian aid and disaster relief.

“[W]e want to work with Vietnam on critical maritime issues, including code of conduct, focusing on the South China Sea and also working to improve freedom of navigation in our oceans,” Panetta said.

A senior defense official called Panetta’s visit to the country “significant” and said Vietnam has “expressed a desire to engage more with the United States.”

“This visit is an effort to take additional steps in that direction to solidify what has become an important relationship for the U.S.,” the official said.

Panetta announced June 2 that the Navy would position 60 percent of its ships in the Pacific over the next decade as part of a new military strategy that calls for greater emphasis on the region. The vessels are now split evenly between the Atlantic and Pacific.

“For that reason, it will be particularly important to be able to work with partners like Vietnam to be able to use harbors like this as we move our ships out from our ports on the West Coast toward our stations here in the Pacific,” he said.

The Pentagon is looking to build capabilities of partner nations in the Asia-Pacific region.

“For that to happen, it is very important that we be able to protect key maritime rights for all nations in the South China Sea and elsewhere,” Panetta said.

The U.S. and Vietnam “normalized” relations 17 years ago.

“The visit is to take stock of where we’ve come, consolidate gains and look for new opportunities,” a second senior defense official said June 2.

Panetta has meetings scheduled with top Vietnamese officials in Hanoi on June 3 and also plans to visit a U.S. detachment that identifies the remains of Vietnam War casualties.

“This sacred mission will continue until all of our troops are accounted for,” Panetta said. “We stand by our pledge that we leave no one behind.”

Panetta served in the Army during the Vietnam War, but never saw combat in the region. His visit is the first time he has traveled to the country.


Jun. 3, 2012 - 10:33AM |
By MARCUS WEISGERBER

Report: Obama Ordered Stuxnet to Continue After Bug Caused It to Spread Wildly


Despite an error in the Stuxnet worm that attacked Iran’s uranium enrichment program, which caused the malware to spread wildly out of control and infect computers outside of Iran in 2010, President Barack Obama ordered U.S. officials who were behind the attack to continue the operation.

That was despite the fact that Stuxnet was spreading to machines in the United States and elsewhere and could have contained other unknown errors that might affect U.S. machines.

The information comes in a new report from The New York Times, which asserts that an error in the code led it to spread to an engineer’s computer after it was hooked up to systems controlling the centrifuges at Iran’s uranium enrichment plant near Natanz. When the engineer left the Natanz facility, he spread it to other machines, writes Times reporter David Sanger, based on a book he has written that will be released next week.

Sources told Sanger that they believed the Israelis introduced the error in the code.

“We think there was a modification done by the Israelis,” an unidentified U.S. source reportedly told the president, “and we don’t know if we were part of that activity.”

Vice President Joe Biden accused the Israelis of going “too far,” a source told Sanger.

According to the Times, Obama wondered to advisers whether the attack should be discontinued after Stuxnet began spreading, believing the operation might have been irrevocably compromised.

“Should we shut this thing down?” Obama reportedly asked at a meeting in the White House Situation Room that included Biden and the director of the Central Intelligence Agency at the time, Leon E. Panetta.

But aides advised him that it should proceed since it was unclear how much the Iranians knew about the code, and the sabotage was still working.

At the time, security researchers were still furiously trying to figure out what Stuxnet was designed to do, and hadn’t yet discovered that it was attacking the centrifuges in Iran. They would later determine that it was very targeted code that was tailor-made to attack only machines in Iran’s enrichment program. Although it infected more than 100,000 computers in and out of Iran, it didn’t do damage to those computers. But given that U.S. authorities appeared to be unclear about what the Israelis might have done to change the code, the exchange between Obama and his advisors seems to indicate that Obama gave the order to continue without the administration knowing precisely whether the code might damage other machines outside of Iran.

In weeks following that meeting, Sanger writes, while researchers at Symantec in the United States were still examining the code, the Natanz plant was hit by a newer version of the computer worm. A few weeks after Stuxnet was detected and disclosed in July 2010, the malware temporarily took out about 1,000 centrifuges in Iran.

The ongoing cyberattack authorized by Obama coincided with the Administration and members of Congress chastising China for its supposed roles in cyber-intrusions into government contractors, human rights groups and Western corporations. The Times piece notes that Obama was aware and concerned that the government’s forays into cyberattacks would give justification to Iran, China and other entities conducting similar attacks against the United States.

According to the Times the first Stuxnet attacks were launched in 2008, a date that is much earlier than previously believed. But those early attacks were small. No two attacks were alike so they caused confusion among the Iranians, who couldn’t figure out the source of problems that were occurring with centrifuges.

By the time President Bush left office in January 2009, the operation had still not accomplished wholesale destruction of centrifuges, and the outgoing president urged Obama to continue the operation.

The story provides new details that expand on a story that Sanger reported in January 2011 when he wrote that Bush had authorized the cybersabotage plan against Iran before he left office, but that Obama had accelerated it once he was inaugurated in January 2009. Sanger had previously written in 2011 that Israel and the United States had worked on the plan in partnership, and had tested it using centrifuges that had been seized from Libya’s defunct nuclear enrichment operations in 2003, which were the same model of centrifuges being used at Natanz.

Sanger’s latest story gets a little confusing in places. It jumps around in time and the organization of it makes it sound as if centrifuges were destroyed at Natanz before Bush left office at the beginning of 2009.

But reports from the U.N.’s nuclear monitoring agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency, indicate that centrifuges weren’t destroyed until much later, likely beginning in the early fall of 2009, after Obama took office.

Because Sanger doesn’t provide actual dates in his story, it’s difficult to determine when exactly events are taking place that he describes. The piece indicates, however, that the Obama administration knew the worm had escaped Natanz before the worm was publicly disclosed in July 2010.

Researchers have uncovered a version of the worm that appeared to have been first launched in June 2009. In March 2010, the attackers launched a new more aggressive wave of attacks against Natanz, that researchers also recovered. It was this version of the worm that spread Natanz wider than intended and eventually led to its discovery.

Sanger describes at least two subsequent attacks of the code after it spread. This coincides with what researchers have found. They say a slightly different version of Stuxnet was released again in April 2010 and that a version of its driver was discovered in July 2010, signed with a new digital certificate, suggesting another version of Stuxnet might have been released at that time.

Sanger doesn’t say what the error was that caused Stuxnet to spread. But researchers found that the attackers added a number of zero-day exploits to the code in the March 2010 attack that hadn’t been in the code previously. These allowed the worm to spread automatically to many machines on the same network as well as to machines on separate networks.

According to the Times, the first stage of the attack operation involved the use of a cyberespionage tool, which Sanger calls a beacon, to siphon intelligence about Natanz’s operations and technical configurations so that Stuxnet could be tailored to attack it. Sanger doesn’t mention the name of this “beacon,” but researchers in Hungary last year discovered a piece of malware they dubbed DuQu, which many believe was the precursor to Stuxnet and was used to gain information from machines in Iran to design the Stuxnet code.

What Sanger describes, however, is code that was placed in control systems made by Siemens, that were being used at Natanz. The beacon was designed to map the operation of the controllers and create an electrical blueprint of the Natanz plant, and send the data back to the National Security Agency. This intelligence-gathering stage took months, according to the Times.

DuQu, however, was not designed to infect Siemens systems and was found on computers that were not running Siemens software. Most researchers also believe that the espionage part of the plot against the centrifuges began outside of Natanz, and that the infection spread from contractors to computers at Natanz, not the other way around.

According to sources who spoke with Sanger, Flame, the most recently discovered malware found infecting targeted machines in Iran and other Middle East countries, was not part of operation Olympic Games and declined to acknowledge whether the United States was behind it.


By Kim Zetter

By wired.com

Thursday, May 31, 2012

US ready to act on Syria outside UN?

The US has hinted at taking actions against the Syrian regime bypassing the authority of the UN Security Council. This comes as pressure is piling up on Damascus following massacre in Houla that claimed over 100 lives.

US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice has said that if the council does not take swift action to pressure Syrian authorities to end 14-month crackdown on the anti-government uprising, the Security Council members may have no choice but to consider acting outside the UN.

Members of the international community are left with the option only of having to consider whether they are prepared to take actions outside of the Annan plan and the authority of this council,” Rice said on Wednesday after the 15-member council met in a closed door session to discuss last week’s massacre.

The United Nations is conducting its own investigation of who exactly is responsible for the bloodshed in the town of Houla. However the US and its allies seem to have come to their own conclusion, saying that the Assad government is solely responsible for the violence.

Rice did not specify what “actions” she meant. However the US and European countries had earlier imposed their own sanction on Syria outside the UN. So there are fears that her words could mean the threat of military action.

The US envoy said the worst but most probable scenario in Syria is a failure of Annan's peace plan and a spreading conflict that could create a major crisis not only in Syria but also in the entire region.

"The Syrian government has made commitments. It has blatantly violated those commitments, and, I think it's quite clear, as we have said for many weeks if they continue to do so there should be consequences," Rice said.

Meanwhile, Syria’s Ambassador to the UN Bashar Jaafari has stated Wednesday that the massacre in the town of Houla was carried out by “professional terrorists” who were seeking to ignite a sectarian conflict in the country.

Many Syrian innocents got killed because of this misbehavior of these outsiders. The Syrian people need one clear-cut message that the international community, if there is an international community, is there to help settling the conflict in Syria," he said referring to last Friday's violence.

Russia’s envoy tot the UN Vitaly Churkin stated that both the authorities and opposition leaders should understand that the current situation in Syria is unacceptable.

Kosovo pattern in Syria?

Susan Rice’s comment became a disturbing reminder of what happened in 1999 when the US and NATO intervened in the former Yugoslavia without a UN Security Council mandate.

The precedent is already there – we’ve mentioned Kosovo. It’s exactly what happened – you had an allegation of a massacre, which was the village of Racak; you had a UN decree that was severely bullied by the US ambassador who was leading the observation mission on the ground; you had claims that it was brutal unprovoked massacre of innocent civilians by government troops. Serbia was blamed, presented with the ultimatum and then bombed,” historian and author Nebojsa Malic told RT.

We have the same pattern repeating itself in Syria.”

Blogger Rick Rozoff believes that the US has warned Russia and China that it will push forward military action no matter what.

Ambassador Rice is basically telling Russia and China and other members of the Security Council that if they do not go along with Western plans for more stringent sanctions and other actions against Syria, the US and its NATO allies reserve a right to act outside the Security Council as they did with Yugoslavia 13 years ago and launch military actions against Syria,” Rozoff told RT.


By rt.com