July 11, 2013: Strategy Page

Most of Israel’s neighbors are undergoing violent upheavals. Lebanon has increasing violence between Sunni and Shia supporters of their respective factions in neighboring Syria. There, the civil war between the Sunni majority and the Shia minority dictatorship has killed over 100,000 people in two years and grinds on. In Egypt the uprising that overthrew the decades old Mubarak two years ago repeated itself when the disappointing and very unpopular Morsi government that replaced Mubarak was shut down by the army.  The 2011 uprising was against corruption and debilitating misrule. Egyptians have noticed that while many other nations have prospered in the last half century Egypt has stagnated. This sense of loss was behind all the Arab Spring uprisings, but most have subsequently suffered from new governments dominated by Islamic conservatives. This was because the dictatorships were able to stifle rival political parties to maintain their rule, but could not shut down what went on in the mosques or religious schools. Here opposition politicians who were Islamic conservatives (or radicals) could survive and reach large numbers of dissatisfied people with the message that Islamic law (Sharia) and politicians who were devout Moslems were the solution. History, both recent and ancient, has shown this to be a false hope but for most Moslems it was the most convenient alternative once the dictatorship was overthrown. In Egypt there had been active Islamic political groups for most of the last century. The main one was the Moslem Brotherhood, which was suppressed by the succession of army dominated governments (that pretended to be democratic but rigged the elections) that began in the 1950s. The Brotherhood split over this, with most of them returning to Mosque based politics and doing what they could to improve the lives of Egyptians. A minority of Brotherhood members went radical and were crushed in the 1990s, after a major outbreak of terrorism. Some of the leaders fled Egypt, and one of them now is the head of al Qaeda. Several of these Moslem Brotherhood leaders (and many followers) helped organize al Qaeda.

The 1990s experience left many Egyptians hostile to Islamic radicalism and suspicious of the Moslem Brotherhood in general. This all played out after the Mubarak government fell in early 2011 and the army helped organize the first honest elections seen in Egypt for decades. The Moslem Brotherhood was the only political force that was organized, experienced and allowed to participate (all the pro-Mubarak parties were banned). The Egyptian middle class (small businessmen and those with an education, even if poor) could not organize in time and the generals knew it. For a year after the uprising the army, and its many corrupt officers, ran a caretaker government and because the unrest had caused higher unemployment (because tourists have stopped coming and foreign and local investment has slowed down a lot because of the uncertainty) any new government would have to take quick action to revive economic activity. Fearing that the Islamic conservatives, who won most of the seats in the new parliamentary elections, would prosecute corrupt army officers and dismantle the economic empire the army has built over the last few decades, the military actively attacked demonstrators, journalists and organizations that advised on how to make a democracy work.  The urban democrats were uneasy about the Islamic conservative political parties and the possibility of a religious dictatorship. But Islamic conservatives, especially the Moslem Brotherhood insisted that this would not happen.  The foreign pro-democracy activists were helping Egyptians more effectively demonstrate against the army, and the army struck back. But Egypt depended a lot on foreign aid, much of it going directly to the army. These aid donors did not like seeing their citizens (foreign aid workers) locked up, and pressured the Egyptian generals to let them go. The army did not have to worry because the Moslem Brotherhood dominated government was beholden to other, often more radical, Islamic groups and imposed rules that hurt tourism and hinted at an attempt to establish a religious dictatorship. The military leaders knew that a religious dictatorship had not been good for their contemporaries in Iran and refused to do anything about the growing anti-government demonstrations and collapsing economy.

Then the army demanded that the Moslem Brotherhood dominated government resign and allow a new one, not dominated by the Islamic conservatives and radicals to be formed. President Morsi refused and was arrested. This was greeted with cheers by the millions of demonstrators still in the streets. Morsi and the Moslem Brotherhood are held responsible for the economic depression since the Arab Spring began two years ago and for generally ignoring the needs of the people. In practice, Morsi attempts to improve the economy were most often stymied by the wealthy (and largely pro-Mubarak) families that do not favor a real democracy, but rather an oligarchy (government controlled by the wealthiest families). It was these families and the army leadership that have the most to fear from a truly democratic government (that would and could punish the corrupt officials, businessmen and generals who profited the most from supporting Mubarak). The unspoken message to any post-Morsi government is that if you don’t mess with the families or the generals, perhaps we can get the economy going again. But the economy will never get into high gear as long as so much of it is controlled by corrupt factions that care more for their own power and wealth than for the overall prosperity of Egypt.

The revolution in Egypt is far from over. While all this unrest next door is uncomfortable for Israelis, it is not a major threat. The Egyptian military does not want war with Israel (which the generals know they would lose, big time, along with billions in American aid), nor do most Egyptians. The Islamic radicals, including Hamas in Gaza, do wish harm to Israel. But the Islamic radicals are anathema to most Egyptians and even the Morsi government was forced to crack down. The problem (or advantage) with Islamic radicals is that tend to turn on those who actually support them and hasten their own demise. Better relations with Israel would be of great economic benefit to Egypt but that is not likely to happen until the malign effects of generations of anti-Israel and anti-Semitic propaganda are tended to. That would take years and Egypt hasn’t even considered going there yet. What any new Egyptian government will have to do is show some economic results, and fast.

The Moslem Brotherhood and other Islamic conservative groups that supported the Morsi government are now organizing protests. Some of the more radical Morsi supporters are planning terror attacks. All this will only increase the popular dislike for the Brotherhood and Islamic radicals. There will always be Islamic conservatives in Egypt, but the memories of the 1990s linger, on both sides of this political fence.

The ouster of Morsi is bad news for Hamas in Gaza. Because Morsi favored Islamic radical beliefs, Hamas saw Morsi as a friend. Morsi, however, insisted that Hamas help control the Islamic radicals in Gaza who considered Morsi “too moderate.” Hamas was happy to comply, because these radical groups considered Hamas too mainstream as well. With the departure of Morsi, the political winds have shifted and not in favor of Hamas. To be on the safe side Hamas has not criticized the Egyptian Army for overthrowing Morsi and is hoping for the best, while bracing for the worst.

Israel has increased military training exercises on the Lebanese and Syrian borders. Reserve units are being prepared for any possible spillover of violence into Israel. On the Egyptian border Israeli cooperation with their Egyptian counterparts improved during the year of Morsi rule and that has not changed with the overthrow of Morsi. Most Egyptians, especially those in the security forces, are hostile to all forms of Islamic extremism.

The pro-Islamic government in Turkey was not happy with the overthrow of Morsi, who was not seen as an ally of Turkey, but at least a kindred (Islamic) spirit. Some Turkish Islamic conservatives blame Israel for the fall of Morsi, but then these guys blame Israel for everything bad. Turkey is suffering from anti-government demonstrations. Not because the government has hurt the economy (quite the opposite) but because there is growing fear that the Islamic conservatives that dominate the government are becoming less democratic and more dictatorial.

In the last two months anti-Israel violence in the West Bank is down by about two-thirds. Most of the violence consisted of throwing rocks or fire bombs (bottles full of flammable liquid) at soldiers, police and Israeli civilians. After the November 2012 “war” with Hamas in Gaza many Palestinians in the West Bank wanted to start another major wave of violence and the amount of such violence in the West Bank started to climb. But the Israelis identified and jailed most of the leaders and organizers of the increased violence and eventually even the Palestinian government in the West Bank agreed to cooperate as the increased violence and Israeli response (more movement restrictions) angered most Palestinians, who saw nothing good coming from it.

July 10, 2013: Although the Egyptian military role in overthrowing the Morsi government was technically a coup (by American definition) and U.S. law bans military aid to any country that suffers such a coup, the U.S. is continuing to deliver military aid to Egypt. The Americans cannot ignore the fact the Morsi was unpopular and his removal was very popular in Egypt. So the American lawyers and politicians are scrambling to create some plausible reason to continue aid to Egypt.

The army is using Moslem Brotherhood organized demonstrations and violence as justification to order the arrest of more Brotherhood leaders. The army is doing what it did two decades ago to cripple Brotherhood capabilities.

July 8, 2013: The military revealed that it had activated a new military Cyber War units dedicated to monitoring networks for Internet based attacks and organizing a quick response. Photos of the operations center for this new unit were shown.

For the first time since the F-16I was introduced in 1998, one suffered an engine failure and crashed. The two man crew ejected and were picked up off the coast. The air force temporarily grounded all its F-16s and F-15s until it could be determined that there was not some common problem at fault.

In Egypt the army opened fire on a demonstration by Islamic radicals and Morsi supporters, killing over fifty of the demonstrators and wounding over a hundred. The army said some of the demonstrators opened fire on the soldiers.

July 7, 2013: The government repeated warnings to Israelis to stay out of the Sinai Peninsula unless it was absolutely necessary. The government noted that Islamic terrorists are more active in the Sinai, as are Egyptian troops and police trying to control the situation.

Hamas revealed that its police had broken up a gang that was counterfeiting Israeli currency and getting it into circulation via Gaza market places. The 100 Shekel ($27.65) notes were good enough to fool some merchants but the counterfeiting was soon noted and the hunt for those responsible was on. The three arrested counterfeiters had already created about $5.5 million worth of these fake notes.

July 5, 2013: There was a large explosion at the Syrian naval base at Latakia. Syrian rebels said this was probably an Israeli missile attack on the warehouse holding new anti-ship missiles recently received from Russia. These high-speed P-800/Yakhont missiles have a range of about 300 kilometers and a 200 kg (440 pound) warhead.

In the Sinai Islamic terrorists made four attacks on security personnel, killing one soldier and wounding three. The attackers were believed to have come from Gaza, so the main border crossing from Gaza to Egypt at Rafah was closed indefinitely.

In Cairo there was a large demonstration by Islamic radicals and Morsi supporters. One demonstrator was killed.

The Egyptian military shut down parliament until new elections.

July 4, 2013: Explosions were heard near the Israeli city of Eilat (at the northern end of the Red Sea.) It was later discovered that at least one 122mm rocket was fired from the nearby Egyptian Sinai Desert. A week later Israeli troops found 122mm rocket fragments outside Eilat. The last such attack was last April. These attacks are launched by Islamic terrorists operating in the Sinai Peninsula.

July 3, 2013: President Morsi was arrested by the army and his government was replaced by military rule until new elections could be held.

July 10, 2013: Strategy Page

Israel is making preparations to deploy a sixth Iron Dome anti-rocket battery this month, with two more coming within the next eight months. Iron Dome is the principal defense against short range rockets fired from Gaza or Lebanon. Iron Dome has a range of 70 kilometers against rockets, as well as artillery and mortar shells up to 155mm. Work is underway to increase Iron Dome range to over 200 kilometers. Meanwhile, Iron Dome remains a controversial mix of battlefield success and controversy.

For example, the Israeli military has had to keep repeating public reminders that the Iron Dome anti-rocket system was not meant for defending towns and villages but military bases and critical infrastructure (power and water). This reminder comes after Iron Dome successfully defeated a Hamas attack (using 1,500 rockets) last November. Many Israelis assumed this meant they could expect similar protection if there were a larger attack from Hamas or Hezbollah. But the military points out that Hamas has over 5,000 rockets and Hezbollah over 40,000. If one or both of these groups fired several thousand rockets, including longer range (over 20 kilometers) ones  the Iron Dome batteries would have to be used to defend military bases and power plants first (otherwise defense of the nation would be imperiled) before trying to cover civilian targets. With a smaller attack the existing number of Iron Dome batteries is sufficient to defend everything, which is what happened last year. But until it is possible to buy more Iron Dome batteries, a major attack will leave many civilian targets vulnerable. With eight batteries available next year, there will still be a need to concentrate on protecting key targets if there is a major attack. The military believes it would need twenty batteries to cover everything but it is unclear if the government can come up with the money for that. The U.S. is supplying some of the cash for this, but not enough for another dozen batteries.

The military has been pointing this out for over three years. The first mention was in response to announced plans to keep the new Iron Dome batteries in storage. At that time politicians were making much of using Iron Dome as a means of defending civilians living close to the border and vulnerable to rockets fired from Gaza in the south and Lebanon in the north. But it turned out that it takes about 15 seconds for Iron Dome to detect, identify, and fire its missiles. Most of the civilian targets frequently under fire from Gaza are so close to the border (within 13 kilometers) that the rockets are fired and land in less than 15 seconds. When longer range rockets are fired there are many more targets (civilian and military) to aim at and Iron Dome is much more effective. This is what happened last November, when Hamas fired many of its longer range rockets at larger towns and cities deeper in Israel.

This explains why, after Iron Dome was declared ready for action three years ago, it was surprisingly (to most Israelis) placed in storage. The air force said they would prefer to save money and put the Iron Dome batteries in storage, to be deployed only for regular tests and training or, of course, for an actual emergency (an expected large scale attack on southern or northern Israel). Politicians demanded that at least one battery be deployed along the Gaza border. Eventually all the batteries were deployed to defend a constantly shifting array of targets. Moving the Iron Dome batteries a lot is good training and confuses the enemy. Meanwhile the military sees Hamas and Hezbollah stockpiling larger numbers of longer range rockets that would enable massive use of long-range rockets against military bases (most of them more than 20 kilometers from the Gaza or Lebanese borders). The generals believe it's more important to protect the military forces, who ultimately defend Israel, and that's what Iron Dome will now be used for, at least when there is threat of a major rocket attack.

Since 2010 Israel has bought eight batteries of Iron Dome anti-rocket missiles. Five are in action and were responsible for defeating the Hamas attack last November, which used a lot of long range rockets. Each battery has radar and control equipment and three missile launchers. Each battery costs about $50 million, which includes 50-100 Tamir missiles (costing $50,000 each). Iron Dome uses two radars to quickly calculate the trajectory of the incoming rocket and do nothing if the rocket trajectory indicates it is going to land in an uninhabited area. But if the computers predict a rocket coming down in an inhabited area, Tamir guided missiles are fired to intercept the rocket. So far Iron Dome has been able to intercept 85 percent of missiles it identified as heading for an inhabited area. The latest version of Iron Dome has a longer range as well as more effective fire control.

This approach makes the system cost-effective. That's because Hezbollah fired 4,000 rockets in 2006, and Palestinian terrorists in Gaza have fired over six thousand rockets in the past eight years, and the Israelis know where each of them landed. Over 90 percent of these rockets landed in uninhabited areas, and few of those that did hit inhabited areas caused casualties. Israel already has a radar system in place that gives some warning of approaching rockets. Iron Dome uses that system, in addition to another, more specialized, radar.

The Palestinians are believed to have tried to defeat Iron Dome by firing a lot of long range missiles simultaneously at a few cities. In theory this could overwhelm one or two Iron Dome batteries. But Israel is able to keep 24/7 UAV watch on Gaza and spot attempts at large scale simultaneous launchers. This enables Israel to bomb many of the launch sites. This results in many rockets destroyed on the ground or launching erratically and landing within Gaza or nowhere near where they were aimed. Because Iron Dome can track hundreds of incoming missiles, quickly plot their trajectory and likely landing spot, and ignore the majority that will not land near people, the Palestinians tried putting hundreds of larger (long range) missiles into the air at the same time to be sure of causing lots of Israeli casualties. So far the Palestinians have not been unable to get enough rockets into the air at the same time to make this work. They may never get this to work, because they have to hide preparations for the simultaneous launch of many rockets and this is very difficult to do undetected.

The Palestinian rocket attacks have been around since 2001, but got much worse once Israel pulled out of Gaza in August of 2005. This was a peace gesture that backfired. From 2001 to 2005, about 700 rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel. Since the 2005 withdrawal, over 5,000 more rockets were fired into Israel. The rate of firings increased after Hamas took control of Gaza in June, 2007. In 2011 700 rockets and mortar shells were fired, this jumped to 2,300 in 2012 when Hamas briefly went to war with Israel. The retaliation was so effective that Hamas agreed to a ceasefire. Thus during the first half of 2013 only about 40 rockets and mortar shells landed in Israel.

Hamas has been bringing in more factory made Iranian and Chinese made BM-21 and BM-12 rockets. Hamas revealed, last November that they had brought into Gaza factory-made BM-21 rockets, each with a range of 20-40 kilometers. They also have lots more shorter range (six kilometers) Russian designed B-12 107mm rockets. The 122mm BM-21s weigh 68.2 kg (150 pounds) and are 2.9 meters (nine feet) long. These have 20.5 kg (45 pound) warheads but not much better accuracy than the 107mm model. However, these larger rockets have a maximum range of 20 kilometers and a flight time of under 15 seconds. Again, because they are unguided, they are only effective if fired in salvos or at large targets (like cities, large military bases, or industrial complexes).

There are Egyptian and Chinese BM-21 variants that have smaller warheads and larger rocket motors, giving them a range of about 40 kilometers and flight time over 15 seconds. Israel found that there are now dozens of even larger Iranian Fajr rockets, with a range of 70 kilometers, plus several hundred extended-range (40 kilometers) 122mm rockets, and even more standard range (20 kilometers) 122mm rockets in Gaza. Before last November there were thought to be over 10,000 rockets stored in Gaza. But between Iron Dome and attacks on storage sites by artillery and smart bombs, over half of those rockets were destroyed.

juillet 9, 2013 Tsahal.fr

Ils sont la crème de la crème bien qu’ils n’aient pas le physique le plus athlétique de Tsahal. Au fond, ils n’en ont pas besoin. Ils sont les ‘tankistes experts’, les hommes des tanks et de l’artillerie.

C’est une belle journée ensoleillée. Environ 40 soldats et leurs commandants ont monté une tente au milieu du désert qui s’étend à perte de vue. Ces ‘tankistes experts’ sont sur le point de finir leur formation d’une durée de deux semaines. Ils étaient déjà commandants de tanks mais à la fin de leur entraînement, ils retourneront dans leurs compagnies en tant qu’experts, chargés d’enseigner à leur compagnie respective la subtilité de la grande guerre des armes à feu.

Aujourd’hui, ils s'entraînent pour les urgences qui peuvent survenir au cours d'une bataille de chars. Chaque ‘tankiste expert’ apprend à se préparer à toute situation.

“Feu!”, est hurlé dans le haut-parleur. Rapidement, les jumelles sont pointées vers le haut et ceux qui n’avaient pas mis leurs boules Quies se bouchent les oreilles avec leurs mains. Six tanks sont alignés à environ 140 mètres et de l'un d’entre eux une flamme et de la fumée s’échappent brusquement du canon. Presque instantanément, un énorme nuage de poussière apparaît deux kilomètres plus loin. L’obus se déplace à approximativement 1200 mètres par seconde.

“Cible atteinte!” On se sert la main et on applaudit de tous côtés. Le commandant Barak Assaf retire la paire de jumelles de ses yeux, le regard satisfait. Ceci est loin d'être son premier tir, mais il ne semble pas être lassé de voir que la cible ait été atteinte. Il est passé suivre le déroulement du cours similaire aux Etats-Unis qui est de dix semaines de plus que le sien. "Nous n'avons pas plus de temps à accorder. Pourtant, nous excellons comme les Américains et parfois même, nous les dépassons dans certains domaines”, dit le commandant.

Il y a six tanks mais de trois modèles différents - le Merkava 2, 3 et 4. lls sont tous différents, c’est ce que disent les ‘tankistes experts’ - certains sont d’anciens modèles, d’autres sont plus récents - mais chaque équipe a son propre modèle.

Sans exception, chacun des six tanks a touché sa cible éloignée de deux kilomètres. Les célébrations se poursuivent, les tankistes sortent de leurs tanks et brandissent leurs poings en l’air, il y a vraiment un sentiment de camaraderie bien que chacun d’eux viennent de brigades différentes.

“Silence!”, crie le commandant Assaf. Les ‘tankistes experts’ se calment. “Maintenant, nous allons viser des cibles situées à 4600 mètres de nous - juste un peu plus de challenge.”

Le premier tir vers la cible très éloignée retentit et ceux scrutant avec les jumelles se regardent l’air déçu : “ils ont manqué de beaucoup.” Le commandant, un peu déçu, s’adresse à ses élèves, proches de lui et dans les tanks, et les corrige. “Vous avez manqué la cible de beaucoup et sur la droite. Arrangez ça : 1.5 et 1.5”, explique-t-il, ajustant ainsi l’inclinaison des canons.

“Cible atteinte!” hurlent les ‘tankistes experts’ une fois le premier obus tiré. Mais cette fois, les célébrations ne se font pas entendre. Les jumelles sont toujours pointées vers les cibles. Deux autres échouent et le commandant se tournent vers ses élèves.

“Ce sont des cibles assez petites”, dit-il. Un soldat sort un petit instrument pour mesurer la vitesse du vent. “2,2 mètres (par seconde)”, crie-t-il. Les corrections à apporter sont indiquées aux équipes dans les tanks. Eloignées de plus de 4500 mètres, les cibles sont atteintes. Des applaudissements se font désormais entendre depuis les tanks victorieux.

Devenir un ‘tankiste expert’

Pour devenir un ‘tankiste expert’, vous devez évidemment être choisi pour la formation. Vous devez aussi être connaisseur de tout ce qui concerne les tanks. Vous apprendrez beaucoup comme par exemple comment la vitesse du vent a-t-elle une quelconque influence et même les effets qu’à la température de l’air sur la trajectoire. Et encore, ce n’est pas parce que vous y êtes invités que vous irez. Devenir un ‘tankiste expert’ ajoute de très nombreuses responsabilités puisque vous conservez vos impératifs de commandant de tanks. Ceux qui font le choix d’y entrer sont ceux qui croient au slogan des tankistes de Tsahal : “l’homme dans le tank vaincra”.

Le sergent-chef Ran Fuhrman est un tel croyant. Il parle de chars avec beaucoup d'enthousiasme.

“Il y a quatre personnes dans un tank : le soldat qui tire, celui qui est responsable des munitions, le conducteur et le commandant”, explique-t-il. “Quand nous ne sommes pas ‘tankistes experts’, nous sommes commandants dans le tank.”

Interrogé sur la possibilité des chars de disparaître un jour des combats, il est très catégorique : les chars ont un atout unique. "Le tank est l’ultime arme. Il y a des munitions pour chaque type de situation et le tank sera toujours le plus précis dans les tirs".

Par dessus tout, la formation pour devenir ‘tankistes experts’ est faîte pour que ces experts en tanks transmettent leur savoir. Trois jours sont réservés à la pédagogie et lorsque la formation s’achève, ils devront eux-mêmes organiser les exercices auxquelles ils avaient participé. C’est ce qui a poussé le sergeant-chef Fuhrman à y entrer.

    "A la fin de la journée, c’est important que nous formions à notre tour”, dit-il. “Si nous gagnons face à l’ennemi, c’est grâce aux tanks. Les chars sont les plus importants - c’est la force aérienne de la terre.”

July 2, 2013 by Arie Egozi - FG

Tel Aviv - Rafael is in the advanced stage of work on the unique communications systems that will be installed in the Lockheed Martin F-35s to be operated by the Israeli air force.

Specific details of the system are highly classified, but the enhancement has been described by one Israeli source as a "big leap in airborne communications".

The equipment will combine some systems that Rafael has developed in recent years, including an airborne datalink system, which the company says provides the ability to accurately process and distribute real-time information to all airborne and ground units and provide total visibility in the theatre of operations. The technology also guarantees reliable, simultaneous, multi-channel voice, data, imagery and video transmissions, it says.

Israel's communications systems for the F-35 will also include elements of Rafael's software-defined communication system. This is designed to enable fast wideband connection between manned aircraft, unmanned air systems and their ground control stations. The equipment will allow the fighter to keep its stealth capabilities in "a variety of fighting modes", says a company source.

Rafael is also adapting some of its air-to-air and air-to-surface weapon system to be carried within the F-35's internal weapons bays.

Israel is due to receive the first of its currently contracted 20 conventional take-off and landing F-35As in 2017.

Jul 1 David Jortner  - israelvalley.com (Source: Hamodia)

Assurément, Verint et Narus – deux sociétés israéliennes fondées dans les années 1990 – auraient préféré continuer à travailler en toute discrétion. Spécialisées dans la collecte et le contrôle des informations, leurs principaux clients sont des sociétés de service et des organismes gouvernementaux.

Peu après les attentats du 11 septembre 2001, un décret du Président américain a autorisé la National Security Agency (NSA) à surveiller sans mandat judiciaire toute l’activité téléphonique et Internet entre les USA et le reste du monde. Pour réaliser cet objectif, la NSA a eu recours aux services de ces deux sociétés israéliennes, fondées par d’anciens vétérans des unités de Tsahal spécialisées dans le renseignement électronique.

Pendant plusieurs années, tout va bien : Verint applique scrupuleusement la mission qui lui a été assignée, et les super ordinateurs de Narus font merveille dans la collecte et le traitement des millions d’informations qui s’échangent chaque jour entre les Etats-Unis et l’étranger. C’est alors que dans cette dynamique aussi discrète qu’efficace se glisse un électron libre qui vient tout perturber : fin mai, Ed Snowden, 30 ans, un ancien de la CIA, et actuellement contractuel de la NSA, révèle à la presse américaine de nombreux détails du gigantesque programme de surveillance national mis en place sous la présidence Bush, et poursuivi par Barak Obama.

Fuite de l’électron libre

En quelques jours les journalistes du Guardian et du Washington Post s’affairent à faire de ce scoop un scandale. L’opinion suit : au nom de la démocratie, du respect des libertés individuelles, de la transparence. Contraint de s’expliquer, le directeur de la NSA avance que « ces pratiques ont permis de déjouer nombre d’attentats, dont un qui devait s’attaquer au métro new-yorkais ». De son côté, la justice tente d’arrêter le fauteur de trouble. Peine perdue, Ed Snowden, prétextant un congé maladie, a jugé bon de s’expatrier. Il serait actuellement à Hong Kong, où il demanderait l’asile politique. On en est là pour l’instant… Les directeurs des sociétés israéliennes Verint et Narus, qui se seraient bien passés de toute cette publicité, ne savent toujours pas s’ils pourront continuer leurs activités – bien qu’ils n’aient rien à se reprocher. Quant aux citoyens américains, que l’affaire révolte et qui réalisent que leur président n’est pas celui qu’on croyait, ils se sont jetés sur « 1984 », le roman de George Orwell – fiction d’une société gouvernée et surveillée par « Big Brother », un tout puissant ordinateur – à tel point qu’il a fallu ces derniers jours en réimprimer plusieurs dizaines de milliers d’exemplaires…

TEL AVIV, Israel, June 28 (UPI)

As the Middle East descends deeper into conflict, Israel's military is set to deploy its sixth Iron Dome counter-rocket battery, produced by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems, and is preparing to take delivery of the first unit of David's Sling, another Rafael anti-missile system.

The new Iron Dome battery, intended to shoot down short-range missiles like the Soviet-designed Grads used by Lebanon's Hezbollah and Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip, has been upgraded and its range extended. That means the system, the only combat-tested weapon in the multilayered anti-missile shield Israel is building, can intercept hostile rockets earlier in their trajectory and minimize damage and casualties.

Iron Dome, heavily funded by the United States, became operational in early 2011.

The fifth and sixth batteries received by the air force, which has control of all air defenses, are improved versions of a system that currently has a kill rate of around 85 percent of those rockets it engages. The sixth battery is expected to be deployed within two months, and could be delivered as early as July.

The Jerusalem Post reported that two further batteries could be deployed by January 2014.

Military planners have said they need 20 Iron Dome batteries to cover all of Israel, although the new-model systems, which can cover wider areas than the earlier variants and intercept multiple targets coming from different directions, may mean that fewer batteries will be required.

Israel's Defense Ministry, hit by budgetary cuts, has had to turn to Washington for funds to buy the batteries, which cost more than $50 million apiece.

The Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency included $220 million in its annual budget in March for Israel to buy more Iron Dome batteries in fiscal 2014. That was the first time the MDA had specifically sought funds for Iron Dome, underlining the U.S. Defense Department's commitment to maintain military aid for Israel, outside the $3.1 billion it gets every year, despite major cuts in U.S. defense spending.

The U.S. House of Representatives Armed Services Committee approved a $284 million funding increase June 6 for Israel's anti-missile shield, including an additional $15 million for the Iron Dome program.

The United States provided $205 million in 2011 for the Israeli air force to buy the first four Iron Dome batteries.

Iron Dome is the bottom tier of the four-level anti-missile shield the Israelis call "Homa," the wall, which will protect the tiny Mediterranean state against the short-range Grads, the longer range Iranian-built Zelzals and Fateh-110s possess by Hezbollah and Iran's strategic Shehab-3 intermediate–range ballistic missiles -- with more advanced Sejjil-2 weapons in the pipeline -- and Syria's Scud-D weapons.

David's Sling, being developed by Rafael and the Raytheon Co. of the United States, was unveiled at the Paris Air Show this month. Until then, all that Israelis been seen of it was a brief video of a secret test in the Negev Desert of southern Israel in November 2012.

Also known as Magic Wand, David's Sling is designed to intercept medium-range missiles at a range of 100 miles.

It's the next layer in the shield above Iron Dome and underwent its first test-flight in February. It's scheduled to become operational in 2014. Each missile costs $1 million.

After that comes Arrow-2, developed by state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries. The $1 billion program was heavily financed by the Americans. Two Arrow-2 batteries are known to have been deployed to intercept ballistic missiles at high altitude and long range.

A more advanced variant, Arrow-3, is currently being developed by IAI and the Boeing Co. of the United States. It will be more powerful, capable of intercepting missiles at altitudes of 70 miles or more outside Earth's atmosphere earlier in their trajectories than Arrow-2.

The primary function of the road-mobile David's Sling system in Israel's current threat environment is to counter the medium-range missiles like the Fateh-100s that Hezbollah now has in considerable numbers north of Israel and which can reach pretty much anywhere inside the Jewish state, including all its cities and major towns.

David's Sling will be able to backstop the two Arrow variants against ballistic and cruise missiles that get past them. It can cover all of Israel from a small number of launch sites around the country.

26/06/2013 Vincent Lamigeon, grand reporter à Challenges -  Supersonique

Cette fois, c’est inéluctable : la dernière édition de l’étude du cabinet IHS sur les budgets militaires et exportations d’armement confirme que le budget de défense de la zone Asie-Pacifique dépassera le budget nord-américain d’ici à 2021, avec 501 milliards de dollars. Certes, les Etats-Unis resteront, de loin, la principale puissance militaire mondiale, avec 472 milliards de dollars de budget en 2021 (-28% par rapport à 2012). Mais la Chine rattrape son retard peu à peu (207 milliards en 2021, +64%), loin devant le numéro trois, la Russie (106 milliards, + 80%). « Donnez à l’Asie et au Moyen-Orient une décennie, et ils vendront des équipements de classe mondiale », assure Guy Anderson, analyste chez IHS Jane’s.

La Chine, 8ème exportateur mondial d’armement, et la Corée du Sud, en pleine explosion, apparaissent comme les concurrents les plus immédiats pour les pays occidentaux. « La Chine diminue ses importations et améliore ses capacités industrielles, ses exportations ont doublé depuis 2008, souligne Paul Burton, chez IHS. Celles de la Corée du Sud, elles, ont augmenté de 688%, ce qui la place désormais dans le top 20. » Les gros clients, eux, restent les mêmes : le top 3 est composé de l’Inde, de l’Arabie Saoudite et des Emirats arabes unis, qui représentent à eux trois près d’un quart des importations mondiales. Ce qui promet de belles passes d’armes sur ces marchés-clés, entre des géants occidentaux en mal de croissance sur leurs marchés domestiques, et des nouveaux acteurs aux dents longues et aux prix agressifs.

En face, l’Europe souffre : sa part de marché est passée de 34,5 à 27,5% de 2008 à 2012. Mais tout n’est pas noir pour autant : les exportations britanniques devraient augmenter d’au moins 25% d’ici à 2015, si l’on se base sur les carnets de commandes des industriels. La France, avec 4,56 milliards d’euros d’exportations d’armement en 2012, est le numéro trois mondial selon IHS, derrière les Etats-Unis et la Russie, mais devant le Royaume-Uni, l’Allemagne, Israël et l’Italie. Elle devrait être le septième budget de défense en 2021 (6ème en 2012). Seule l’Allemagne s’est effondrée depuis 2008 côté exportations, avec une part de marché divisée par deux (de 8 à 4,5%).

Autre leçon de l’étude IHS : la taille du pays n’est un critère déterminant. Israël est ainsi en train de devenir le premier exportateur mondial de drones : l’Etat hébreu dépassera les Etats-Unis fin 2013, et vendra même deux fois plus de drones que l’oncle Sam en 2014 ! Les exportations d’armement israéliennes ont augmenté de 74% depuis 2008, avec une part de marché passée de 2,4 à 3,5%.

Une chose est certaine : la vente d’armement reste, qu’on s’en réjouisse ou non, un marché d’avenir. La somme des budgets de défense devrait augmenter de 9,3% d’ici à 2021 selon IHS, à 1 650 milliards de dollars. Le commerce entre pays a déjà augmenté de 30% de 2008 à 2012 et devrait passer la barre des 100 milliards de dollars en 2018. « A ce rythme, les échanges militaires entre pays auront plus que doublé d’ici à 2020 », assure Paul Burton. Un gâteau plus gros, mais aussi plus de convives pour le partager.

GENEVE, 26 juin - RIA Novosti

Moscou est toujours prêt, si besoin, à envoyer ses casques bleus sur le plateau du Golan, a déclaré mercredi devant les journalistes à Genève le représentant spécial du président russe pour le Proche-Orient et vice-ministre des Affaires étrangères, Mikhaïl Bogdanov.

"Nous l'avons proposé. Si cela est nécessaire, nous sommes prêts à les envoyer", a dit le diplomate.

Et de rappeler qu'à l'heure actuelle, les soldats de la paix des Fidji étaient déployés à la ligne de désengagement entre Israël et la Syrie.

L'Autriche avait annoncé début juin son intention de se retirer de la "zone tampon" entre la Syrie et Israël, en motivant sa décision par la "menace inadmissible" pesant sur la vie de ses casques bleus déployés dans cette région. Le président russe Vladimir Poutine a indiqué que la Russie était prête à remplacer les casques bleus autrichiens, mais a souligné que cela pourrait se faire uniquement sur demande de l'Onu et à condition que les pays de la région l'acceptent.

Le porte-parole de l'Onu Martin Nesirky a expliqué toutefois que l'accord de désengagement et le protocole signés entre la Syrie et Israël n'autorisaient pas la participation des membres permanents du Conseil de sécurité de l'Onu aux opérations onusiennes dans le Golan.

Une révision du mandat de la Force des Nations unies chargée d'observer le désengagement sur le plateau du Golan (FNUOD) implique l'accord des deux parties en conflit, notamment d'Israël et de la Syrie.

Les autorités syriennes ont salué l'initiative de Moscou, alors que le vice-ministre israélien des Affaires étrangères, Zeev Elkin, a fait remarquer que la présence de casques bleus russes dans le Golan était impossible pour des raisons juridiques.

Moscou estime pour sa part que les arguments de l'impossibilité de l'envoi de casques bleus russes sur le plateau du Golan relevaient des réalités d'il y a quarante ans, et qu'un nouveau protocole pourrait être signé si les parties y tenaient.

La semaine dernière, Daniel Meron, haut fonctionnaire du ministère israélien des Affaires étrangères chargé des relations avec l'Onu et les organisations internationales, n'a pas exclu une modification du mandat de la FNUOD, compte tenu de la nouvelle donne dans la région. Il n'a cependant pas précisé en quoi cette modification pourrait consister.

26-06-2013 French.china.org.cn (Agence de presse Xinhua)

Israël a été classé sixième exportateur d'armes mondial par le groupe de consultants spécialisés dans la défense IHS Jane's, a rapporté mardi le quotidien Ha'retz.

Selon une étude du groupe, Israël a vendu l'équivalent de 2,4 milliards de dollars américains en armes en 2012. Les États-Unis occupent le 1er rang du classement avec des contrats en armement totalisant plus de 28 milliards de dollars américains de gains en 2012.

Le rapport souligne que les exportations israéliennes d'ordre militaire ont augmenté de 74% entre 2008 et 2012, essentiellement en raison d'accords signés avec l'Inde, l'un des plus gros clients d'Israël en armes. Toujours selon IHS Jane's, Israël figure parmi les plus grands exportateurs mondiaux de drones ou UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles).

L'étude, publiée tous les ans depuis la crise économique internationale de 2008, est le fruit de l'analyse de 34.000 plans d'armements.

Selon des estimations du ministère israélien de la Défense dévoilées en janvier, les exportations d'ordre militaire du pays se sont élevées à 7 milliards de dollars américains en 2012, soit une hausse de 20% par rapport à 2011.

25 juin 2013 Romandie.com (AFP)

LONDRES - Malgré la crise économique, le commerce mondial des armes a augmenté de 30% en quatre ans et pourrait doubler d'ici à 2020, mais la croissance des exportations de l'Asie-Pacifique menace la domination américaine et européenne, selon une étude publiée mardi à Londres.

Deux choses sont en train de se produire, explique Paul Burton, analyste auprès du groupe de consultants spécialisés dans la défense IHS Jane's. Les budgets de défense se déplacent à l'est et la compétition internationale s'accroît dans le marché de l'armement. On assiste à la plus grande explosion du commerce mondial d'armes que le monde ait jamais connue.

Les exportations et les importations d'armements dans le monde sont passées de 56,5 à 73,5 milliards de dollars (de 43 à 56 milliards d'euros) entre 2008 et 2012, selon l'étude publiée par IHS Jane's.

A ce rythme, le marché pourrait atteindre 100 milliards de dollars d'ici 2018 et avoir plus que doublé d'ici 2020.

Mais la part de l'Europe occidentale a baissé, tombant à 27,5% en 2012 contre 34,5% en 2008, alors que celle de l'Asie-Pacifique, Chine incluse, grimpait de 3,7% à 5,4% sur la même période.

Beaucoup de pays d'Asie ont ainsi vu leurs exportations doubler, à l'instar de la Chine qui a nettement amélioré ses capacités de production et qui est passée de la 10e à la 8e place des exportateurs mondiaux.

La percée des exportations de la région Asie-Pacifique menace la domination américaine sur l'industrie de défense mondiale, souligne ce rapport.

Cependant, tempère Ben Moores, analyste à IHS Jane's, si la Chine se débrouille plutôt bien pour exporter auprès de ses voisins régionaux, elle n'est pas présente au Moyen-Orient, notamment à cause de la qualité de ses armements. Un pays sud-américain a récemment renvoyé un système de radars à une entreprise chinoise car il ne fonctionnait tout simplement pas.

Les États-Unis, actuellement premiers exportateurs devant la Russie et la France, ont eux importé 10,5 milliards de dollars d'équipements et de services militaires depuis 2008. Ces importations devraient continuer à augmenter en 2013, d'après ces analystes.

Les budgets de défense des pays d'Asie-Pacifique devraient en outre dépasser ceux des États-Unis et du Canada d'ici 2021, atteignant 501 milliards de dollars (+35% par rapport à 2013). Avec en tête dans cette région, la Chine, suivie par l'Inde, le Japon, l'Australie et la Corée du Sud.

Globalement, la progression des budgets de défense dans le monde devrait aussi se poursuivre: ils pourraient atteindre 1.650 milliards de dollars d'ici 2021 (+9,3% par rapport à 2013).

Israël, pour sa part, devrait devenir le premier exportateur de drones d'ici la fin 2013, devançant les États-Unis, et en vendre deux fois plus que les Américains d'ici 2014.

Les exportations israéliennes sont vraiment impressionnantes, alors que de nombreux pays musulmans refusent de faire affaire avec eux, constate Ben Moores.

21 juin 2013 Usine Nouvelle

L'opération Serval au Mali a mis en évidence un fait marquant de l'évolution des armées modernes : les drones prennent une place de plus en plus importante au sein des forces armées du monde entier. L'achat par la France de 12 Reaper américains, drones également utilisés par les Britanniques, montre le retard pris par l'industrie européenne sur le segment des drones Male (Moyenne altitude longue endurance). Sur ce créneau, l'engin de General Atomics domine sans conteste et, sur le salon de Bourget, il éclipse les solutions européennes et israéliennes…

Reportage photo

Jun 14, 2013 ASDNews Source : Elbit Systems Ltd.

    JHMCS II is More Intelligent, More Capable and More Affordable

Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System II (JHMCS II), an upgraded and improved version of the classic JHMCS and the world's first high definition, color, smart-visor system that operates in both day and night mode, will be making its debut at the Paris Air Show in Hall 3, Booth E111 from June 17-21.

"JHMCS II is more intelligent, more capable and more affordable," said Mark Hodge, Vice President Business Development of Elbit Systems of America, LLC, "We worked alongside warfighters to create a superior system that improves information access for the flight crew."

The JHMCS product line has evolved to be considered the best, field-proven technology available in providing the pilot with intelligent vision. For over 15 years, the JHMCS has been a combat-proven helmet-mounted display for fixed-wing aircraft, including F/A-18, F-15, and the F-16.

The JHMCS II product family has been developed to meet the needs of the modern military aircrew and provide a superior level of situational awareness. Flight crews fly JHMCS around the world and during combat operations. "Pilots flying with JHMCS II will have a decided advantage when they observe, orient, decide and act," said Hodge.

13/06/2013 par Jacques N. Godbout – 45eNord.ca

Après les enlèvements de Casques bleus de la FNUOD, la Force des Nations Unies chargée d’observer le désengagement sur le plateau du Golan, la détérioration de la situation sécuritaire dans cette région et la récente décision de l’Autriche de retirer ses observateurs, le secrétaire général de l’ONU, Ban Ki-moon, doit lancer un appel pour éviter à la mission d’observation une panne fatale de personnel.

Le Secrétaire général appelle les États membres de l’ONU à fournir des observateurs pour la mission de l’ONU il évoque la nécessité d’effectuer des ajustements de l’opération, y compris le renforcement des moyens d’autodéfense des Casques bleus qui ne sont, pour l’instant, armés qu’un simple revolver de service.

Ban Ki-moon, a admis ce jeudi que les affrontements récents dans le Golan syrien contribuaient à renforcer les tensions entre la Syrie et Israël et menaçaient la sécurité des civils et du personnel de l’ONU: « Les activités militaires dans la zone de séparation ont le potentiel de faire escalader les tensions entre Israël et la République arabe syrienne et de mettre en danger le cessez-le-feu entre les deux pays » dit-il dans son rapport sur la FNUOD au Conseil de sécurité.

«Toutes activités militaires dans la zone de séparation représentent un risque pour la stabilité du cessez-le-feu et pour la population civile, ainsi que pour les membres du personnel des Nations unies sur le terrain », reconnaît le Secrétaire général.

La FNUOD, une des plus vieilles missions de l’ONU, avait été créée en 1974 pour contrôler l’application du cessez-le-feu entre les forces israéliennes et syriennes dans le No Man’s Land situé sur le plateau du Golan après la guerre du Kippour en 1973.

La présence des forces armées syriennes dans cette zone, les attaques israéliennes et les menaces des dirigeants syriens d’agir contre Israël dans le Golan occupé, outre constituer des violations graves de l’accord de désengagement de 1974, exposent les Casques bleus de la FNUOD à des risques croissants et de plus en plus difficiles, voire même impossibles à gérer.

Mardi dernier, encore deux Casques bleus ont été blessés lors d’affrontements dans la zone, en mai, des Casques bleus avaient été enlevés puis relâchés, plusieurs dépôts d’armes de l’ONU ont été endommagés, détruits ou pillés.

«Je compte sur les deux pays [Israël et la Syrie] pour prendre les mesures nécessaires pour protéger les civils et assurer la sécurité des observateurs de la FNUOD, ainsi que pour assurer la liberté de mouvement des Casques bleus dans l’ensemble de la zone des opérations »,écrit Ban Ki-moon dans son rapport, soulignant que « Pour sa part, l’ONU fera tout pour assurer que le cessez-le-feu entre Israël et la République arabe syrienne continue de tenir».

Malgré toutes ses difficultés, Israël et la Syrie ont donné leur accord à la prorogation de la mission:«Dans le contexte actuel, je considère que la présence de la FNUOD est essentielle. Je recommande donc au Conseil de sécurité de proroger le mandat de la force pour une période de six mois, jusqu’au 31 décembre 2013», indique le Secrétaire général en soulignant que les gouvernements israélien et syrien ont donné leur accord à la prorogation.

À lire aussi:

Des observateurs de l’ONU se retirent du plateau du Golan>>