Defence`s Feeds

The U.S. are ready to defend South Korea after the umpteenth provocative action by North Korea . On Jan. 10, 2016 in  response to the North Korea’s recent nuclear test, a U.S. Air Force B-52 from Andersen Air Force Base, Guam, performed a low-level flight over Osan Air Base, South Korea. A Republic of Korea […]

In this Long Post, James Rogers asks whether pro-Europeans in the United Kingdom are able to review and update their narrative, enabling them to effectively challenge the Eurosceptics’ hegemony.

The post Can the British pro-European cause be salvaged? appeared first on European Geostrategy.

This video shows that an Iranian ship actually fired rockets near USS Harry S. Truman. As reported by several media outlets on Dec. 26, 2015 an Iranian vessel approached aircraft carrier USS Harry S. Truman (CVN-75) while transiting the Strait of Hormuz and fired rockets in a direction away from the American flattop. According to […]

Here are some incredible photos captured by a Travis Air Force Base KC-10 Extender aircrew. We have already published a cool aerial photograph and footage of the flyover conducted on Jan. 1, 2016, by a B-2 Spirit belonging to the 509th Bomb Wing from Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri that opened the 102nd Rose Bowl […]

Another cool “brttttttttt video.” Filmed throughout acceptance trials for a new lot of ammunition, this impressive clip shows a GAU-8/A Avenger Gatling Gun firing from a test stand. What makes this video interesting is the fact that although the muzzle was placed 40 feet from the camera you can clearly hear the noise of the […]

With the year in full swing, there is no turning back for the UK’s latest Strategic Defence and Security Review. One of the areas that has come under particular focus is the role of the Royal Engineers, with recognition that a more demanding environment mandates a requirement for

ACO Marine was formed in 2006 as a dedicated division of Germany’s ACO Group, a multi-national world leader in surface drainage systems with an annual turnover approaching US$1bn.

The Indian Navy has commissioned INS Kadmatt, the second of four Kamorta-class Project 28 (P28) class anti-submarine warfare (ASW) corvettes, during a ceremony held at the Naval Dockyard, Visakhapatnam, India.

Singapore Technologies Marine Ltd (ST Marine) announced the interim delivery and acceptance ceremony for the Royal Oman Navy's (RNO) third patrol vessel (PV), RNOV Sadh.

Damen Shipyards has been awarded a contract by the Mexican Navy (Secretaria de Marina) to construct three 42m-long patrol vessels.

Mil Qualified Displays and Rugged Panel Computers for the Marine Defence Industry

Some cool U.S. Army CH-47F Chinook images. Taken on Aug. 21, 2015, the following beautiful pictures show brand new CH-47F Chinook helicopters from Hotel Company 1-214 Aviation Regiment, 12th Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB), taking off after refueling at a local German airport and flying in a convoy formation enroute to Bremerhaven port. The new CH-47F […]

The WC-135 is going to search for fallout from the alleged North Korean test. A U.S. Air Force WC-135 will soon be in action near the Korean peninsula, searching for fallout from the alleged North Korea’s nuclear test. According to the Washington Post, a U.S. defense official confirmed that the WC-135 Constant Phoenix atmospheric collections […]

And so it begins… again. Today’s North Korean nuclear test comes as no surprise. In April 2015 North Korean scientists indicated they were developing fusion technology, and last month Kim Jong-Un, the Stalinist regime’s leader, stated the country had a hydrogen weapon capability. While these claims may be an exaggeration, this most recent test still suggests technical advancements and has strategic implications. Nuclear weapons remain a crucial security tool for North Korea, and the West, particularly the United States, can meet this threat by maintaining and strengthening its own deterrent whilst promoting arms control- a delicate balance, to be sure.

This is North Korea’s fourth nuclear test and follows tests in 2006, 2009, and 2013. Information about the test is still trickling in, but the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) Organization’s International Monitoring Service, along with geological surveys and various governments, reported an ‘unusual seismic event’ at 1:30 UTC in the northeast region of North Korea, close to the Punggye-ri site of the previous nuclear tests. North Korea issued a press announcement that it had tested a ‘miniaturised hydrogen bomb’, developed as ‘self-defense against the U.S. having numerous and humongous nuclear weapons.’

Based on initial reports and seismic readings, the test measured at 5.1 on the Richter scale, meaning an explosive yield between 1 and 30 kilotons equivalent of TNT, and in all likelihood it was a single-stage atomic weapon potentially with boosting technology. Hydrogen weapons, also often referred to as thermonuclear weapons or fusion weapons, are more sophisticated than fission weapons and were only developed by the advanced nuclear states after years of testing. In as simple terms as possible, a ‘boosted’ device is one in which fusion technology increases the yield of an atomic weapon. The more advanced and challenging design is a multiple-stage thermonuclear weapon, with a fission primary that triggers a secondary fusion detonation. This can be further expanded upon in a three-stage weapon, such as the Tsar Bomba, the Soviet Union’s largest nuclear weapon ever exploded that produced a yield of 50 megatons. The yield of today’s nuclear test is much smaller than what would be expected of thermonuclear weapon, and therefore was likely a boosted weapon.

Monitoring of nuclear testing includes various techniques which eventually may be able to confirm whether or not the test was a hydrogen device, but North Korea has a track record of exaggerating its nuclear test performance. Its 2006 test was likely a ‘fizzle’, whereby the explosion inefficiently used the nuclear material by burning through it faster than it could produce a self-sustaining chain reaction. Pyongyang claimed its 2013 test was a miniaturized device, which requires technological advances well beyond its previous tests, but there was no evidence to support this claim. With regards to today’s test, as one North Korea expert posited, ‘North Korea may be claiming a successful hydrogen bomb test because it’s not grabbing much attention with atomic bombs.’ This test may prove to be underwhelming for the North Koreans, but still sets off at least three alarm bells.

First, it is a technological achievement because regardless of the success of the fusion technology, whether boosted or two-stage, North Korea will benefit from the new data generated by the test. The next test might not be a failure and North Korea is producing enough fissile material to ‘waste’ it on testing rather than saving it for nuclear weapons in its arsenal. Second, the test demonstrates Pyongyang remains willing to be an international pariah despite international pressure and waning support from China. Previously, North Korea relied heavily on Chinese financial and political support, but that may no longer be the case as Beijing has already condemned the test, as it did in 2013, and summoned the North Korean ambassador to lodge a protest. The big question is whether or not China has the leverage to reign in Pyongyang.

And finally, North Korea continues to rely on nuclear weapons for regime security and as a symbol of the Kim dynasty’s longevity and status on par with other nuclear powers. North Korea is not alone in its reliance on nuclear weapons. Over the past two years Russia has participated in nuclear ‘sabre-rattling’ and continued to emphasize the role of nuclear weapons in its military doctrine. Other states, such as Pakistan, remain reliant on nuclear weapons for security, as well, in the face of a conventionally superior adversary.

Nuclear disarmament advocates will likely point to today’s test as evidence of the need for a nuclear weapons ban and for nuclear possessors to further reduce reliance on nuclear weapons. Conversely, more hawkish analysts are likely to call for more nuclear capabilities, more missile defence, and more reliance on nuclear weapons to meet this growing threat. Nuance is in short supply in most contemporary nuclear debates.

But deterrence and arms control are not mutually exclusive, and North Korea’s nuclear posturing offers an opportunity for the West to practice this principle. It can ensure the norm against nuclear testing is upheld by speaking out against the North Korean test, levying further sanctions against the Kim regime, and cooperating with the CTBT Organization.

In light of the Russian and North Korean tandem nuclear threats, the United States can strengthen its deterrent by increasing investment in the nuclear infrastructure and proceeding with renewal and modernization of existing nuclear capabilities, reassuring allies of extended nuclear deterrence guarantees, and continuing to engage in activities such as joint exercises, rather than standing down in the face of North Korean aggression. More must be done to strengthen deterrence both to reassure allies, but also to reassure adversaries that any nuclear aggression will be met with retaliation.

Due to Russian aggression, 2015 was a dismal year for nuclear weapons policy, and North Korea has started 2016 on a similarly sour note. But 2015 was also the year of a major arms control breakthrough with the Iran nuclear agreement that brought together the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany in a unique and powerful multilateral effort to target nuclear transgressions. The goal for 2016 should be similarly ambitious. One possible step would be for the United States and China, jointly, to revisit ratification of the CTBT. They are two of the eight remaining states, including North Korea, that inhibit the treaty’s entry into force. Partisanship along with damning reports about the status of the U.S. nuclear infrastructure will not make this easy. But if done in parallel with Chinese ratification this would further stigmatize North Korea, demonstrate multilateral cooperation on denuclearization, and be a tangible contribution to nuclear disarmament. And if done in parallel with steps to strengthen deterrence, 2016 could have potential for striking that delicate balance necessary for security and stability.

In this Long Post, Sven Biscop argues that should the UK decide to leave the EU its leverage on the strategic decisions that shape the framework within which its military deployment takes place would be negligible.

The post Brexit and defence: where is the strategy? appeared first on European Geostrategy.