22 Nov 2011 Defensenews AFP

WASHINGTON - NATO countries are taking tentative steps to pool military resources in the face of shrinking defense budgets and to fill gaps exposed by the recent Libya campaign, a French general said Nov. 22.

The alliance hopes to unveil a number of cooperative projects in time for a NATO summit in Chicago in May that may include joint training for pilots of allied aircraft and shared maintenance for NATO vehicles, said Gen. Stephane Abrial, supreme allied commander for transformation.

"Budgets are decreasing everywhere. We cannot expect any possibility to spend more," Abrial told reporters at a Pentagon briefing.

"We need to spend better and the best way to spend better is to do more things together," he said.

The NATO-led air war exposed shortcomings among U.S. allies and underscored the need for sharing costly military resources, said Abrial, who is overseeing what the alliance calls the "Smart Defense Initiative."

NATO officials say the air campaign revealed how European states lacked munitions for fighter jets, unmanned drone aircraft, refueling tankers, targeting specialists and planes equipped for electronic jamming.

Under the initiative begun in February, the alliance has drawn up a long list of about 160 projects for pooled funding and expects a number of concrete programs to be announced when NATO meets in Chicago next year, he said.

"I'm very encouraged by the initial contacts I've had," said Abrial, who has visited about half of the alliance's 28 member states to discuss the initiative.

He said projects are "slowly moving from intentions to decisions" and that he is "very confident we'll be able to bring something to the table."

Two projects that will likely be ready to launch include plans for coordinated training of pilots for both helicopters and warplanes and arranging shared maintenance for an array of allied vehicles, planes and vessels - instead of each country having to fund separate training and maintenance efforts, according to Abrial.

The alliance was also looking at pooling funds to buy more unmanned aircraft for intelligence and surveillance and to organize a joint supply of expensive precision-guided munitions, he said.

During the six-month Libya air war, European governments ran low on munitions and had to turn to the United States to buy precision-guided bombs.

"Is there a way to procure, maintain and store (munitions) together in groupings of nations? We're looking at these aspects," he said.

Abrial acknowledged some challenges in trying to persuade alliance countries to share military hardware and expertise, as governments had concerns about jeopardizing local defense industries as well as sacrificing a degree of sovereign control.

Countries had to strike "a balance between sovereignty and solidarity," he said.

19.11.2011 par P. CHAPLEAU Lignes de Défense

Le 30 novembre 2011, à 17h30, 29 quai Voltaire, Paris 7^e,dans le cadre des« Mercredis de la Documentation française », aura lieu une conférence débat sur le thème « Afghanistan : en sortir ou pas ? ».

Jean de Ponton d'Amecourt, ancien ambassadeur de France en Afghanistan, Yves Boyer, professeur à l'École polytechnique et directeur adjoint de la FRS, Gérard Fussman, professeur au Collège de France,  Jean-Luc Racine, directeur de recherche CNRS au Centre d'études de l'Inde et de l'Asie du Sud de l'Ehess, et Isabelle Saint-Mezard, docteur en sciences politiques et enseignante à l'Inalco, feront un bilan, dix ans après le début du conflit afghan, et à la lumière de ses multiples facettes, de l'état des forces en présences et analyseront les perspectives d'avenir de la zone Afpak.

Plusieurs parutions récentes de la Documentation française sont consacrées à cette thématique:

- AfPak Afghanistan - Pakistan, n° 50 de la revue Questions internationales de la Documentation française, juillet-août 2011.

- La politique étrangère de la France, « De la fin de la guerre froide au printemps arabe », par Frédéric Charillon, publié en juin 2011 dans collection les Études de la Documentation française. 

Pour s'inscrire :  bernadette.guilloux@dila.gouv.fr ou par tél au 01 40 15 71 74

27th Oct 2011 By Jean-Michel Guhl in Cazaux, France - defencereviewasia.com

ONE of the most present and most concealed threats on the battlefield remains the shoulder-launched surface to air missile or Manpads – an abbreviation of man-portable air defence system. A light affordable and plentiful weapon with a low acquisition cost, it is also a war tool that outweighs by multiples the price of its likely target - a tactical fighter plane, helicopter or even a multi-engined airlifter. Intended for air defence by the military, Manpads have also unfortunately over the years landed in the hands of uncontrolled groups or terrorist organisations, accounting for some dramatic deadly attacks on civilian transport aircraft as well.

ONE of the most present and most concealed threats on the battlefield remains the shoulder-launched surface to air missile or Manpads – an abbreviation of man-portable air defence system. A light affordable and plentiful weapon with a low acquisition cost, it is also a war tool that outweighs by multiples the price of its likely target - a tactical fighter plane, helicopter or even a multi-engined airlifter. Intended for air defence by the military, Manpads have also unfortunately over the years landed in the hands of uncontrolled groups or terrorist organisations, accounting for some dramatic deadly attacks on civilian transport aircraft as well.

During the Soviet war in Afghanistan (1979-1989), thousands of US-made FIM-92 Stinger shoulder-launched missiles were supplied, by the CIA via Pakistan, to the Mujahideen, along with British-made Blowpipes, older US FIM-43 Redeyes, and even Egyptian (Ayn-as-Sakr - Falcon Eye) and Chinese (HN-5) copies of the infamous Soviet 9K32M Strela (NATO SA-7b) Manpads!

These 10-kg missiles, capable of reaching Mach 2 in 5 seconds and with an average lethal range of just a few kilometres, were responsible for the destruction of many Soviet airlifters, as well as transport and attack helicopters. Only dedicated “shturmovik” fighter-bombers like the Su-25 “Frogfoot” and Su-22 “Fitter” fared much better, in general, thanks to their extremely sturdy airframe construction. From experience gained in that war and in peacetime exercises prior to 1994, the Soviets found that the best way for a group of gunships to survive their own attack run was to fly at extremely low altitudes towards the target and then split up, approaching it from different directions. After making their attacks, the helicopters would make a break-off turn and depart at extremely low altitudes, their wingmen providing mutual covering fire and all of them making full use of their electronic warfare equipment (decoy flares and IR jammers). Most of these techniques have also been adopted in the West. Just as a reminder: 333 airplanes and helicopters were lost by the Soviets to Manpads during their war 25 years ago.

Combating the Manpads threat has gained in importance in recent times with the use of countermeasures using various techniques. IRCM systems are designed to defeat both surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles by detecting the ultraviolet (UV) or infrared (IR) radiation from the missile exhaust trail and then initiating responses. Counter-measures include both flares – which are designed to give the missile a decoy target – and laser jammers – which cause missile guidance systems to abruptly steer away from the target aircraft.

In order to tackle the lingering Manpads menace as a whole, and with the Soviet tactical experience in mind, NATO has been organising every other year in Europe, since 1991, a series of two live exercises designated MACE and Embow. If MACE caters in priority with more expensive electromagnetic (EM) self-defence systems, Embow focuses only on ways to counter heat-seeking (IR) missiles fired from the ground.

Embow XIII in Cazaux air base

A total of sixteen nations participated in the 13th venue of Embow in 2011. The event took place at Cazaux, in France, and saw the attendance of participants from: Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Norway, France, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Turkey, UK, US, with Australia and New Zealand joining as longtime faithful allies of NATO from “down-under”. Aircraft involved were varied, ranging from fighter-bombers to attack helicopters, and from transport helicopters to big airlifters like the C-130 Hercules.

Orchestrated by NATO’s SG2/Aerospace Capability Group 3 on “Electronic Warfare and Survivability”, the main aim of Embow is to allow aviators to test, under live and monitored conditions, the capacity of their aircraft to evade infrared-guided surface-to-air missiles, from basic Manpads to more advanced surface to air short-range systems (SHORADS). As a cherry on the cake, the Embow trials are always performed in highly instrumented areas so that the participants can take a close look at the actual efficiency of the systems they field. Any noticed discrepancy is then funneled, in a second move, back to the industry for updating and improvements.

Spanning four weeks, from 18 September to 12 October, Embow XIII placed a strong priority on how to enhance or optimise the self-protection systems of NATO aircraft currently participating in overseas expeditionary missions: fighters, airlifters and helicopters alike. True to say, US airplanes and rotorcraft from other NATO nations have paid, since 2002 in Iraq and Afghanistan, a heavy toll to the insurgents, while furthermore ongoing air operations over Libya have proved in combat the value of the different EW systems developed by the European industry for their current generation aircraft.

As such, European manufacturers of electronic warfare equipment took advantage of Embow XIII to test current as well as prototypes of future EW systems during some 100 “live firing” sorties from Cazaux AB performed over the DGA Biscarosse test site and its extensive network of radars and trajectography equipment.

This was particularly the case for EADS Cassidian and the Spanish company Indra who used a CASA 212 test-bed from the French DGA (the French Defence Procurement Agency) to put on trial a new DIRCM designed for the self-protection of high-value transport aircraft. Dubbed Manta, this multi-spectral multi-band high-energy laser-based system (developed in partnership with Rosoboronexport of Russia), is able to counter several Manpads launched simultaneously from short distances. It is intended to equip the A400M at a later stage.

For the Embow XIII evaluation, Indra’s Manta was linked to sensors from Cassidian’s AN/AAR-60 MILDS (Missile Launch Detection System) as used today on many NATO tactical airplanes and helicopters, like the Tiger, Mangusta and Black Hawk.

Burning fires of deception

If the use of chaff (metal foil) in combat dates back to World War 2 – clouds of small metallic dipoles being dropped by attacking bombers to deceive or jam German radars – the use of flares (burning decoys) as counter-measures against heat-seeking missiles is more recent and truly appropriate for the jet age. The ubiquitous Infra-Red Countermeasures

(IRCM) decoy flare is nearly 50 years old. Simple, robust and effective, for many years it was the only means of providing aircraft protection against the IR-guided missile. For today’s flying combat machine, as a matter of fact, chaff and flares are a very common and worthwhile method of evasion against an incoming missile or to disrupt the “lock-on” of a tracking radar.

Initially a US invention – used first in the 1960s on the B-47, B-52 and B-58 strategic bombers aiming to penetrate heavily defended Soviet defence lines – IR flares never saw wide usage during the larger part of the Cold War. Aircraft-mounted self-defence flare launcher systems were first witnessed to be widely used by Israeli aviators over Beirut – particularly noticeable on TV newsreels - during the Lebanon war of 1981 and subsequent air operations against the PLO. Flares were also widely used by the Soviets over Afghanistan a few years later. With the widespread introduction of the SA-7 in 1984 and Stingers in 1985, helicopters became exposed to those missiles, and soon all of them were equipped with flare dispensers, active IR jammers, and exhaust dampers to reduce their infrared (IR) signatures. At first, only Mi-24 “Hind” attack helicopters were so equipped, but eventually Mi-8 “Hip” transports received these counter-measures as well.

In fact, the Israeli Air Force’s brand-new General Dynamics F-16A Block 10 Fighting Falcons were unique in 1981 in being the first Western fighter jets to include the fitting of ALE-40 chaff/flare dispensers – systems for long reserved only for US strategic bombers – to provide an adequate self-protection against heat-seeking missiles. This was based on something the Israelis had learned the hard way during the Yom Kippur war of 1973. An intense conflict where, according to subsequent White House debriefings, the Israeli Air Force lost no less than 102 aircraft – 32 F-4s, 53 A-4s, 11 Mirages and 6 Super Mysteres – mostly to Egyptian and Syrians surface to air missiles. Two helicopters, a Bell 205 and a CH-53, were also shot down this way. In all these cases, the Israeli aircraft were totally devoid of any IR self-defence systems.

What exactly are these IRCM systems? They are in fact a very simple invention, based on canisters bolted to the airframe and firing one or more flaming decoys in sequence in the direction of an incoming infrared-guided missile. IR flares are cartridges usually discharged individually or in salvoes by the pilot (or automatically by a tail-warning system on cue). Usually accompanied by simultaneous vigorous evasive manoeuvering, these decoys are supposed to lure a missile and make them miss them intended target by heading to the decoy’s heat source instead.

Since they are intended to deceive infrared missiles, these flares burn at temperatures of thousands of degrees, incandescing in the visible spectrum as well. They have proved their value repeatedly in combat. Flare decoys are however only effective in the terminal phase acquisition of missiles fitted with IR signature seeker heads, i.e. a very short moment in time, which explains why fully automatic self-defence systems with cued sequencers are now preferred.

Flare decoys are simple inexpensive cigar-sized containers, in general square or round, commonly composed of a pyrotechnic composition based on magnesium or another hot-flaming metal, with burning temperature equal to or hotter than an aircraft engine exhaust. As said, the trick is to make the infrared-guided missile seek out the heat signature from the flare rather than that of the aircraft’s engine(s).

In contrast to electro-magnetically (EM) radar-guided missiles, IR-guided missiles are very difficult to spot as they close on an aircraft. They have no radar signature, and they are generally fired from the rear, directly toward the jet pipe of an aircraft or the hot exhaust of a turbine. In most cases, during combat, pilots have then to rely on their wingmen to spot the missile’s characteristic smoke trail and alert them. Since Manpads are inherently far shorter-legged in distance and altitude range than their radar-guided counterparts, good situational awareness of altitude and potential threats continues to be a very effective defence against them. Luckily, much more advanced electro-optical systems – as developed over the past two decades – can now detect missile launches automatically from the very distinct emissions of a missile’s rocket motor, both in the infrared (IR) and ultra-violet (UV) bands.

How does it work? In flight, once the presence of an IR missile is indicated, flares are released by the aircraft in quick succession in an attempt to decoy the incoming missile; most IRCM systems are automatic, while others – the earlier ones – required manual jettisoning of the flares, thus limiting their efficiency. The aircraft will then pull away at a sharp angle from the flare (and the terminal trajectory of the missile) and reduce engine power in attempt to cool its thermal signature. Optimally, the missile’s seeker head is then confused by this change in temperature and sudden flurry of new hotter signatures, and therefore follows the flare(s) rather than the aircraft… giving the pilot(s) a chance to fight again another day!

For the IR generating cartridges, two approaches are possible: either pyrotechnic or pyrophoric. “As stored”, explains Major Thomas Vermeersch, a test pilot with DGA in Cazaux, “chemical-energy-source IR-decoy flares contain pyrotechnic compositions, pyrophoric substances, and highly flammable substances. Upon ignition of the decoy flare, a strongly exothermal reaction is started, releasing infrared energy and visible smoke and flame, the potency of the emission being dependent on the chemical nature of the payload used.” There are a wide variety of calibres and shapes available for aerial decoy flares depending on their manufacturer. In short, due to volume storage restrictions on-board modern platforms, many aircraft of US origin employ square-shaped cartridges. Cylindrical cartridges (from 19 to 60mm in general) are used mainly on board French aircraft as well as those of Russian origin. They are much more resistant to warping and handing damages.

The coming of DIRCM systems

But in the present day combat theatre, flares are not enough, and new inventions are now being conceived to deceive shoulder-launched infrared missiles. This is especially so with the development of new-generation seekers, dubbed SG4 by NATO, that are now able to discriminate easily between jet pipes and flaming decoys. This aptitude was well demonstrated in a video shown to the press in Cazaux by Isabelle Lecuyer, the person in charge of aircraft self-protection systems with DGA. This revealed that a Mirage 2000D dropping traditional flares could not evade the “lock-on” of a newer generation IR tracker - thus giving the sword a clean edge over the shield…

But new counter-measures are being designed in order to protect aircraft further against the Manpads threat. Among the most promising is the Directional Infrared Counter-Measure system (DIRCM), a solution nowadays principally produced by Northrop Grumman, ITT Corporation and BAE Systems in the USA, and by Elbit Systems in Israel. Thales, Terma, Saab and Indra in Europe are also working on new DIRCMs, as is Russian industry.

More advanced than conventional flare-based IR counter-measure systems, a standard DIRCM is a lightweight, compact system designed to provide mission-vulnerable aircraft – like strategic airlifters and large helicopters – with increased protection from common battlefield IR threats. The term DIRCM is used as a generic moniker to describe any IRCM system that tracks and directs energy toward the menace. Such is the AN/AAQ-24 Nemesis, a DIRCM system which consists of a missile warning system (AN/AAR-54), an integration unit, a processor, and laser turrets (Small Laser Targeting Assembly, SLTA). Early versions used an arc lamp to generate the jamming signal. Newer versions use diode-based pump systems. DIRCMs will be installed as standard on C-17 and MC-130 airlifters, and CV-22 and CH-53E rotorcraft. Nemesis is also the basis for the Northrop Grumman Guardian system marketed for commercial aircraft. Pending the completion of ICAO tests on the viability of such options, they will likely be fitted to many commercial carriers in the near future. So will the Large Aircraft Infrared Counter-Measure system (LAIRCM) and LAIRCM-Lite which is a strict C-17 programme that uses a combination of laser jammers and flares due to the limited availability of some LAIRCM components.

First US try at fooling the IR threat

It took some time for scientists to develop IR countermeasures. By the mid 1960s, an understanding of missile operations and radiation emission from pyrotechnic flames was becoming more mature. As a result, the objectives of new research contracts in the USA became more specific. They undertook the task to develop a pyrotechnic source that radiated in a narrow wavelength band and emitted selectively:

1 - in the specific IR bands resulting from the radiation produced by aircraft;

2 - and capable of operating in the sensitive region of the detector used in the adversary missile guidance system.

The requirement of this effort brought the first attempt to create a pyrotechnic decoy that radiated in regions corresponding to regions where aircraft usually diffuse heat. Today one might identify such a decoy as a “spectral or colour adapted” flare, but in the mid 1960s the researchers did not appreciate how important it would be to have a decoy that would radiate with the proper spectral properties.

In 1967, the US Navy China Lake test centre reported on the development of a decoy flare intended for launching from the AN/ALE-29 dispensing set installed on a number of US military aircraft. The goal was for the flare to defeat the AA-2 “Atoll” short-range, infrared homing air-to-air missile developed by the Soviet Union using the Sidewinder 1A as a surrogate. This was a not too complex issue, in reality, as the “Atoll” (Vympel K-13) was similar in appearance and function to the American AIM-9 Sidewinder (after which it had been reverse-engineered using an unexploded missile recovered in China in September 1958). Early flare developments were aimed at providing protection in the infrared 2m to 3m bandpass region. As missiles improved, the threat moved to also operate in the infrared 3m to 5m bandpass region. In 1968, the US Navy set out to develop a family of infrared flares that were effective in the 3m to 5m bandpass region. They considered changing the combustion mode to a much higher rate, burning more material, lengthening the flare by two inches, altering the AN/ALE-29 dispenser to “squarish” holes, and altering the composition to improve efficiency. The Mk 46 Mod 0 flare, put in production in 1968, was the first US-made flare developed with the above objectives. The need for 120-150 decoy flares on an aircraft operating in a dangerous area was considered mandatory. It was the first time that IRCM investigators suggested that the number of flares that could be carried by aircraft of that era would be insufficient to provide complete protection.

But it took another 10 to 15 years for IRCM systems to become commonplace, and once the Manpads threat turned into a “no escape” lethal issue - something complicated by the use of antiquated weapons like the RPG against low flying aircraft - thus adding more odds in the unending battle between the sword and the shield.

November 15, 2011 defpro.com

During Exercise Steadfast Juncture 2011 which took place in Lithuania from November 1 to 12 readiness level of the Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum (JFC-B) (Netherlands) to take the lead of the NATO Response Force (NRF) in 2012 was evaluated. The event involved military and civilian personnel of several NATO commands and headquarters which had been chosen for duty in NRF in 2012.

Command Post Exercise, which was located in the Pabrades Training Area, tested and provided evaluation of functioning of JFC-B command, control, communications, and information systems, readiness of the command post for deployment, operations and sustention, and collaboration with other forces.

Certification of NRF was based on a crisis response operations scenario involving deployment over a long distance beyond the Alliance’s borders and fulfillment of certain tasks. “We generated a scenario reflecting all the typical challenges NATO forces face in modern world,” said Maj Gen Jean Fred Berger, commander of the NATO's Joint Warfare Centre (Norway) and officer in charge of the scenario of Steadfast Juncture 2011.

During the Exercise events were organised to give a closer view on the event for Lithuanian and foreign political and military representatives, including Minister of National Defence of Lithuania Rasa Jukneviciene and Chief of Defence of Lithuania Lt Gen Arvydas Pocius, Minister of Defence of Latvia Dr. Artis Pabriks and Chief of Defence of Latvia Maj Gen Raimondas Graube.

Lithuania has been a host of such NATO exercise for the first time. “As a host nation Lithuania has done a really great job to have the Exercise go smoothly. “My implication regarding the best reviews of the Exercise Command and of JFC Commander is that Lithuania has established a higher standard for such exercise and reaffirmed its name as a reliable NATO country,” Chief of Defence of Lithuania Lt Gen Arvydas Pocius commented on the Exercise.

During the Exercise a Deployable Command Post brought from Italy was stationed in the Pabrades Training Area and provided shelter and workspace for several hundred of military and civilian personnel from al the Alliance’s countries as well as NATO partner countries. Lithuanian company which will end its tour of duty in NRF this year was in charge of protecting the command post throughout the Exercise.

Steadfast Juncture 2011 took place simultaneously in 6 more countries apart from Lithuania: Greece, Italy, Germany, Spain, Norway and the Czech Republic, and data exchange was ensured over the NATO communications and information systems.

In line with respective requirements, the NRF rotation for 2012 was certified in Steadfast Juncture 2011 as highly ready and technologically advanced, comprising land, air, maritime and special operations forces components, and deployable within an especially short time to operations in any region of the world.

14 novembre 2011 Par Rédacteur en chef. PORTAIL DES SOUS-MARINS

Des périodes imprévisibles et intenses d’opérations maritimes en Méditerranée sont un des outils utilisés par l’OTAN pour contrer toute tentative des terroristes. Baptisées “Deterrent Surges”, ces opérations mettent en œuvre des moyens de l’OTAN convergeant vers des zones définies pour une période prédéfinie. Elles permettent non seulement de lutter contre le terrorisme, mais aussi de construire et de renforcer la connaissance de la situation maritime de la zone par l’Alliance Atlantique.

A partir du 12 novembre, l’OTAN a commencé à concentrer des moyens en Méditerranée orientale pour plus d’une semaine de patrouilles intensives.

« Le socle de cette opération Deterrent Surges est le groupe “Standing NATO Maritime Group 2” et la reconnaissance aéro-maritime. Pour cela, nous avons ajouté des bâtiments libérés spécifiquement pour cette opération, » explique le capitaine de vaisseau Olivier Bodhuin, chef des opérations au Headquarters Maritime Command de Naples. « La France et la Roumanie apportent une contribution importante à cette opération, montrant que les nations donnent une grande importance à l’opération Active Endeavour, plus de 10 ans après son lancement. L’aviso Commandant Birot a récemment quitté l’opération Unified Protector, au large de la Libye, et, en tant que Français, je suis très satisfait de voir le Birot participer à l’opération Deterrent Surges en soutien direct aux opérations, » a déclaré le commandant Bodhuin.

Selon le contre-amiral Javier Gonzalez-Huix, adjoint Opérations, l’opération Active Endeavour n’a jamais cessé un instant, malgré les opérations au large de la Libye. « Il est clair que les demandes de bâtiments étaient importantes pour la Libye, mais l’attention portée à Active Endeavour n’a jamais disparu de cet état-major. Souvenez-vous que cette opération n’est pas seulement des bâtiments en mer. Il y a un réseau de renseignement qui la soutient et des technologies sophistiquées qui fonctionnent toute la journée, tous les jours. »

Référence :OTAN

11/11/2011  Contributor:  Paul Smyth - defenceiq.com

For NATO, the Libyan crisis is a welcome success.  The Alliance largely fulfilled it’s United Nations mandate to protect civilians and member states wanting Gaddafi’s removal.  Despite some tragic collateral incidents the 7-month military campaign was executed with unprecedented precision, no NATO personnel were killed and the intervention was successfully concluded without putting ‘boots on the ground’.  Officials in Brussels and the other coalition capitals may feel justifiably pleased, but behind any pride or contentment should be a major concern that casts a shadow over the success of the intervention.

As freedom fighters liberated Tripoli media clips showed how easily Gaddafi’s many weapon stocks could be pilfered.  Most worryingly the looting included Man Portable Air Defence Systems (MANPADS), raising the spectre that terrorist or insurgent groups may acquire such deadly weapons.  With NATO dominating the sky over Libya revolutionary forces had no need for air defence weapons, so where have they gone?

Bombarded by NATO’s air power Gaddafi’s forces may have been issued with MANPADS but they do not appear to have featured much in the conflict and no coalition jets were shot down over Libya.  Perhaps a combination of coalition tactics, inadequate user training (especially among mercenaries) and poor serviceability limited the use of deployed missiles, but the paucity of reported missile firings is a concern as it suggests Gaddafi’s forces may not have fielded many of the missing weapons.

If, instead, a number of MANPADS have been smuggled out of Libya, coalition achievements there may be spoilt by events elsewhere.  Should the conflict result in terrorist or insurgent groups receiving a welcome boost to their ability to attack commercial and military aviation, the success of NATO’s operation would be compromised by an increased threat to civil aircraft, military drones and helicopters.

Despite popular portrayal in TV dramas and Hollywood movies, in reality terrorists have great difficulty in obtaining surface-to-air missiles.  They are expensive, cannot be home-made, attract a higher level of intelligence interest, and have a shelf-life.  Plenty of terrorists hope to target commercial aircraft but few have the means to do so.  Access to looted Libyan MANPADS may bring that intent closer to reality, especially as some of Gaddafi’s missiles were advanced weapons with increased performance.  Unfortunately, despite other successes, the Libyan War may prove to be an unwelcome milestone in the threat to airliners.        

Gaddafi’s missing MANPADS could pose a threat not only to civil aviation but also military aircraft.  In 2006, Israeli Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) played a crucial part in the Lebanon War, yet despite Hamas’ considerable preparation for the conflict and the resistance it offered to Israeli ground forces it failed to prevent UAVs having a ubiquitous presence over the battlefield.  Western nations pursued a similar omnipresence over Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan and have become used to operating UAVs where the greatest risk to drones is a mid-air collision.  If an irregular enemy had access to modern MANPADS that calculation would change and possibly disrupt UAV activity.  With their growing dependence on UAVs Western forces would be annoyed to find that their success in Libya produced an own-goal elsewhere.    

Similarly, Afghan insurgents have frequently targeted ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) helicopters but with rare success.  Often they are forced to use unguided Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPGs) as anti-aircraft weapons.  The arrival of ex-Gaddafi MANPADS in Afghanistan would enhance the insurgent threat to helicopters and sour the sense of achievement felt by those ISAF member nations which fought in Libya.

Special efforts to find and recover lost missiles are extremely welcome and should be pursued with the utmost alacrity, not just through national initiatives but also by concerted international activity.

Intelligence sharing is one obvious area where parochial barriers must be overcome to assist the retrieval of these weapons.  The celebrations following Gaddafi’s demise will soon pass.  The danger from looted surface-to-air missiles will not.  Until these are dealt with he will cast an ominous shadow over the aviation community with airliners, UAVs and helicopters at particular risk.  Gaddafi’s MANPAD legacy may yet tarnish NATO’s success.

 2011-11-08  xinhua

Le président des Etats-Unis et le chef de l'OTAN Anders Fogh Rasmussen se sont engagés lundi à prendre davantage de mesures pour renforcer les capacités de défense de l'alliance militaire afin de faire face aux menaces de sécurité du XXIe siècle.

Lors de leur rencontre à la Maison Blanche, les deux dirigeants ont identifié cet axe d'actions comme l'un des objectifs du sommet de l'OTAN qui se déroulera les 20 et 21 mai 2012 à Chicago.

"Ils ont convenu que le sommet de Chicago devrait s'efforcer d'élargir et d'approfondir les relations de l'OTAN avec d'autres pays partenaires non membres de l'OTAN", a aussi fait savoir la Maison Blanche.

MM. Obama et Rasmussen ont également discuté de l'opération militaire de l'OTAN en Libye, d'une durée de sept mois, qui a aidé l'opposition libyenne à renverser le régime de Mouammar Kadhafi et à prendre le contrôle du pays.

Par ailleurs, le président américain a examiné avec M. Rasmussen les "progrès importants" réalisés dans le cadre de la mission de l'OTAN en Afghanistan et la façon dont le sommet de Chicago pourrait définir la phase suivante, qui constituera une étape majeure de transition pour le pays.

Lors du sommet de Lisbonne en novembre 2010, les dirigeants de l'OTAN se sont fixés l'objectif d'amorcer la réduction de la présence militaire en Afghanistan en 2011 en vue d'un transfert complet du contrôle des missions de sécurité aux Afghans d'ici 2014.

Dans son discours télévisé du 22 juin, M. Obama a annoncé le retrait de 33 000 militaires américains d'Afghanistan d'ici l'été 2012 et envisagé le retrait des 70 000 soldats restants d'ici 2014.

Nov 7, 2011 ASDNews Source : General Dynamics Corporation (NYSE: GD)

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada - General Dynamics Canada recently completed the last in a series of on-time deliveries of updated computer systems for the 16 operator consoles aboard each NATO Airborne Warning and Control Systems (AWACS) aircraft, as well as on two aircraft mission simulators. The AWACS Computer Upgrade Project was awarded to General Dynamics Canada by the NATO AWACS Programme Management Agency (NAPMA) in July 2009.

"The upgraded mission consoles make the NATO AWACS the most advanced aircraft of its kind in service today," said Mike McKinnon, Senior Program Manager for NATO Programs at General Dynamics Canada. "AWACS crews can now conduct their missions with unprecedented speed and effectiveness."

Designed and engineered specifically for the NATO AWACS aircraft and simulators, the upgraded operator consoles deliver a substantial improvement in computing features, capabilities and performance compared to the previous system. Among the improvements, the upgraded consoles deliver faster collection and collation of situational awareness and tactical information, enabling mission operators to more efficiently track and direct air and ground assets while maintaining vital connections with ground command centers.

General Dynamics Canada also supplies the Mission Data Recorders (MDR) and Mission LAN Systems (MLS) for the NATO AWACS fleet. The MDRs record, time-tag and store all mission data and audio communications that take place during a mission. The MLS is the central backbone of the fiber-optic local area network within the aircraft. It provides switching of all high-speed Ethernet data communications among the mission consoles, multi-sensor integration computers, the MDR and airborne mission computers.

NATO operates a fleet of 17 Boeing E-3A 'Sentry' AWACS aircraft from the NATO Air Base in Geilenkirchen, Germany. The NE-3A is a modified Boeing 707 equipped with long-range radar and passive sensors capable of detecting air and surface contacts over large distances.

28/10/2011 Sources : EMA

Le 20 octobre 2011, l’amiral Edouard Guillaud, chef d’état-major des Armées (CEMA), s’est rendu au commandement allié de la transformation (ACT, Allied Command Transformation ).

Le CEMA s’est entretenu avec le général Stéphane Abrial, commandant suprême des forces alliées pour la transformation (SACT, Supreme Allied Commander Transformation ) pour évoquer les dernières avancées en matière de cyberdéfense et de défense antimissile.

Il a poursuivi sa visite en saluant la contribution du personnel des services français, militaires et civils, au quartier général de l’ACT et le bénéfice partagé à la fois par l’OTAN et la France dans cette coopération.

La France a été l’un des 24 pays à signer l’accord de collaboration formalisée entre l’ACT et les services de transformation des nations lors de la table ronde des responsables de la transformation en décembre 2010.

October 25, 2011 defpro.com

MOSCOW | NATO is still prepared to grant membership to Georgia and Ukraine on condition that they implement reforms, NATO Deputy Assistant Secretary General James Appathurai said on Tuesday, according to RIA Novosti.

Georgia has been negotiating NATO membership since 2006, when it signed the Intensified Dialogue on Membership Issues.

In April 2008 at the Bucharest NATO summit, Georgia and Ukraine were given a green light for NATO accession on condition that they carry out military and political reforms.

“Georgian government has been working hard to secure membership in NATO in accordance with the Bucharest agreements,” Appathurai said during the press conference in Moscow. “In Georgia's case, reforms and compliance with NATO standards are required, including practical and political measures.”

However, he said Georgia is unlikely to be included in the NATO Membership Action Plan (MAP) that is due to be announced at the upcoming alliance's summit in Chicago in 2012.

The MAP, which was launched in April 1999 at the Alliance’s Washington Summit, is aimed to help countries aspiring to NATO membership in their preparations. (RIA Novosti)

MOSCOU, 26 octobre (Xinhua)

Un officiel de l'OTAN a déclaré mardi que le système conjoint anti-missile proposé par la Russie était impossible, mais que Moscou devrait connecter son système de défense anti-missile à celui de l'alliance occidentale.

L'OTAN a rejeté la proposition russe car elle ne peut sous-traiter sa sécurité à des pays tiers, a expliqué James Appathurai, représentant spécial du secrétaire général de l'OTAN dans le Caucase et l'Asie centrale, dans une interview accordée à l'agence de presse Interfax.

Moscou s'oppose au déploiement des installations de défense anti-missile de l'OTAN près de ses frontières, déclarant que cela représenterait une menace pour sa sécurité et bouleverserait l'équilibre stratégique des forces en Europe.

La Russie a également cherché pendant longtemps à obtenir une garantie juridique de la part de Washington et de l'OTAN comme quoi son système de défense anti-missile ne visait pas la Russie.

Mais M. Appathurai a déclaré que si la Russie connectait son système de défense anti-missile à celui de l'OTAN, Moscou obtiendrait "une garantie finale de 100%".

Selon lui, le système de l'OTAN dirigé par les Etats-Unis ne peut représenter une menace pour les missiles stratégiques russes pour des raisons évidemment techniques.

"Nous avons été clairs sur ce point: il (le système de défense anti-missile) n'a pas les capacités techniques pour bouleverser la capacité russe à contrer une frappe nucléaire", a souligné M. Appathurai.

This handout image courtesy of the US Missile Defense Agency shows a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) being launched at the Pacific Missile Range Facility off the island of Kauai in Hawaii (AFP Photo / HO /US Missile Defense Agency)

25 October, 2011, Robert Bridge, RT.com

NATO officials say they are willing to “cooperate” with Russia in the US missile defense system for Europe, while balking on the possibility of building a single system.

The US missile defense shield slated for Europe “does not pose any threats to Russia's defense capabilities,” James Appathurai, NATO's Deputy Assistant Secretary General told his Russian hosts at a press conference in Moscow.

The NATO official went on to say that the shield lacks the technical capabilities to disrupt Russia's potential to fend off a nuclear strike.

As for providing written "legal guarantees" that the system would not be aimed at Russia, Appathurai balked, saying they were not needed.

The “ultimate guarantee”  for Russia is to connect its system to NATO's, he said. As for specifics, the NATO official only offered vague suggestions, like providing “data exchanges and coordination” between the two systems.

Needless to say, the proposal did not sit well with Russia's Ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin.

"If Mr. Appathurai is really certain that technically the US missile defense cannot create impediments for Russian strategic nuclear forces, then what is the reason for the US refusal to put these guarantees on paper," he asked.

At least providing legal guarantees is the only way to convince the parties of the seriousness of their intentions, Rogozin added.

Moscow has said in the past that anything short of full cooperation in the developmental and operational stages of the system will be unacceptable. More than that, failure to come to terms could be the spark that ignites the next arms race.

"In the coming decade we face the following alternatives,” Russian President Dmitry Medvedev warned. “Either we reach agreement on missile defense and create a full-fledged joint mechanism of cooperation, or … a new round of the arms race will begin.”

It is clear that this scenario would be very grave, Medvedev added.

Thus far, however, few people in Europe – the very people who will be caught in the middle of any hypothetical arms race – seem to understand how serious Russia is about this system, and the threat it potentially poses to its national security.

The NATO official, certainly aware of Moscow’s growing frustration with the stalled negotiation process, expressed hope that NATO and Russia would continue to cooperate if Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is elected president next year. Given the dubious level of cooperation thus far between the two sides, however, Appathurai may be in for a bitter surprise.

After all, it was Putin in Feb. 2007 who lectured NATO in general and the United States in particular over the “almost uncontained hyper use of force – military force – in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts.”

“I think it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernisation of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security in Europe,” Putin told fellow delegates at the Munich Security Meeting. “On the contrary, it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust.”

Thus, it remains to be seen how NATO and Russia will continue their relations in the increasingly likely event of Putin being elected president next year.

Appathurai said the formation of a single system – which apparently is not the same thing as "data exchanges and coordination" – is impossible since "NATO cannot entrust its security to third parties."

NATO cannot go beyond these limits or cooperate with other partners, however strongly they may be trusted, he said, adding that the western military bloc has already made “serious concessions” to Russia.

Appathurai succeeded in raising eyebrows even further with his announcement that Georgia and Ukraine will become members of NATO if they decide to implement the reforms which are in line with NATO standards.

Exactly what those “standards” may be, especially given NATO’s track record of late, was not specified.

In light of Russia’s experience with its less-than-predictable neighbors, Appathurai’s comments will not be well received. On August 7, 2008, for example, Georgia launched a major military offensive against Russian peacekeepers and civilians in Tskhinval, the capital of South Ossetia, thus sparking a 5-day war that culminated in a ceasefire agreement five days later.

How Russia will respond to a hostile government being granted membership in an increasingly active military bloc is anybody's guess.

Meanwhile, Ukraine, which has a lengthy lease agreement with Russia’s Black Sea Fleet, has been prone to severe political seizures, most recently with the imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko, the former Ukrainian prime minister who was found guilty of abuse of office and sentenced to seven years.

Speaking on the situation in Libya, which just witnessed the death of former leader Muammar Gaddafi after he had been taken prisoner, the NATO Security General assured that the new Libyan authorities will not create an extremist Islamic state.

The Libyan transition authorities have reassured us and the global community that the political process will proceed in strict accordance with the international law and human rights, he told the press conference at Interfax offices in Moscow.

Meanwhile, NATO is not imposing “development paths” on any country, he added.

Each country has the right to “democratically create its political system, its own laws, its own cultural values, and we respect that right,” he said. The “generally accepted principles of human rights” are very important for us, and we constantly remind our friends, in particular, Libya, about the need to respect them, Apparthurai said.

Russia has expressed its concerns with the NATO military operation in Libya, which had been limited to the task of “protecting civilians,” saying that the military bloc exceeded its mandate,” basically siding with the anti-government forces.

in this Thursday, Sept. 8, 2011 file photo, a portrait depicting Libya's former ruler Moammar Gadhafi is riddled with bullet marks and vandalized with paint on a wall in Tripoli. AP photo

October 21, 2011 TRDEFENCE - The Associated Press

NATO’s top commander said today he will recommend the end of the alliance’s seven-month mission in Libya. Adm. Jim Stavridis made the announcement on his Facebook page ahead of a meeting of the North Atlantic Council, the alliance’s governing body.

In this Thursday, Sept. 8, 2011 file photo, a portrait depicting Libya's former ruler Moammar Gadhafi is riddled with bullet marks and vandalized with paint on a wall in Tripoli. AP photo

The council, which comprises envoys from all 28 member countries, is deciding on when and how to end its bombing campaign in Libya a day after Moammar Gadhafi’s death.

“As [supreme allied commander] I will be recommending the conclusion of this mission to the NAC in a few hours,” Stavridis wrote. “A good day for NATO, a great day for the people of Libya.”

The council’s decision will depend on his recommendation, but will also take into account the wishes of Libya’s new government and of the United Nations, under whose mandate NATO carried out its operations.

NATO earlier said its commanders were not aware that Gadhafi was in a convoy that NATO bombed as it fled Sirte. In a statement Friday, the alliance said an initial Thursday morning strike was aimed at a convoy of approximately 75 armed vehicles leaving Sirte, the Libyan city defended by Gadhafi loyalists.

One vehicle was destroyed, which resulted in the convoy’s dispersal. Another jet then engaged approximately 20 vehicles that were driving at great speed toward the south, destroying or damaging about 10 of them.

“We later learned from open sources and allied intelligence that Gadhafi was in the convoy and that the strike likely contributed to his capture,” the statement said.

After Libya’s former rebels killed Gadhafi on Thursday, officials said they expected the aerial operation to end very soon. But the North Atlantic Council may also decide to keep air patrols flying for several more days until the security situation on the ground stabilizes. The success of the military operation has helped reinvigorate the Cold War alliance and polished the reputation of France and Britain, the two countries that drove it forward. Analysts attributed its success to the fact that NATO remained steadfast over the summer during a long and grinding stalemate against Gadhafi loyalists and avoided the temptation to send ground troops into Libya.

NATO’s Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen says the end of the campaign “has now moved much closer.” He has also hailed the success of the mission, saying that it demonstrated that the alliance continues to play an “indispensable” role in confronting current and future security challenges. NATO warplanes have flown about 26,000 sorties, including over 9,600 strike missions.

They destroyed Libya’s air defenses and over 1,000 tanks, vehicles and guns, as well as Gadhafi’s command and control networks. The daily airstrikes finally broke the stalemate that developed after Gadhafi’s initial attempts failed to crush the rebellion that broke out in February.

In August, the rebels began advancing on Tripoli, with the NATO warplanes providing close air support and destroying any attempts by the defenders to block them. French President Nicolas Sarkozy said Friday that “the operation has reached its end.” But how to draw down the campaign will be decided “with our allies and also with input from the (interim government).” But in London, Britain suggested that NATO may not immediately complete its mission in Libya, wary over the potential reprisal attacks by remaining Gadhafi loyalists.

“NATO will now meet to decide when the mission is complete, and once we are satisfied that there is no further threat to the Libyan civilians and the Libyans are content, NATO will then arrange to wind up the operation,” British Defense Secretary Philip Hammond told BBC radio. Sarkozy, British Prime Minister David Cameron and President Barack Obama discussed the NATO campaign in a video conference late Thursday.

“They discussed the need to maintain the NATO-led operation while a threat remained to civilian life,” a spokeswoman for Cameron’s office said, on customary condition of anonymity.