Feed aggregator

À l'occasion des 80 ans du Débarquement en Normandie, le président français Emmanuel Macron présidera le 6 juin une cérémonie internationale à Omaha Beach. Comme tous les 10 ans, l'anniversaire du Jour-J est devenu un rendez-vous incontournable pour de nombreux chefs d'État. Mais ces commémorations n'ont pas toujours connu une dimension politique et diplomatique, évoluant au fil des décennies.

Citizens in the EU Member States will elect their representatives to the European Parliament during the European elections of 6 to 9 June. The newly elected Members, representing EU citizens until 2029, will meet in July to elect their President, Vice-Presidents and Quaestors. They will decide on the composition of Parliament's standing and sub committees - thereby launching the new legislative term. The committees will then hold their first meetings to elect their respective Chairs and Vice-Chairs.
European Elections 2024 website
European Elections News
Fact Sheet: Electoral procedures for the European Parliament
AFET-SEDE-DROI calendar of meetings 2024
Meeting documents
Webstreaming
Source : © European Union, 2024 - EP

DÉCRYPTAGE - Alors que le chef de l’État veut saturer l’espace médiatique en cette dernière semaine de campagne, une bonne partie de ses troupes se projette déjà sur la suite.

LA VÉRIFICATION - Les Républicains et La France insoumise ont annoncé, ce lundi, saisir l'Arcom après l’annonce d’une prise de parole du président de la République ce jeudi sur France 2 et TF1, à 24 heures de la clôture de la campagne électorale.

Les agences humanitaires affirment que la quantité d'aide qui entre à Gaza est si faible qu'il y a un risque de famine.

CONTRE-POINT - Le premier objectif qu’Emmanuel Macron déteste sera de laisser passer l'orage. Tenir, c'est parier que l'impact du résultat des européennes, même spectaculaire, s'estompe rapidement.

REPORTAGE - À moins de six jours du scrutin, le chef de file des Républicains s'est offert, en compagnie du président de la région Normandie, une petite déambulation dans le centre-ville avant de tenir une réunion publique devant plus de 250 personnes.

The U.S. military’s collapsed pier in Gaza is symbolic of a much bigger issue.

Magyarország déli határához közel éppen 25 esztendeje zajlott a Jugoszlávia ellen indított Allied Force művelet. A bombázóhadjárat az amerikai légierőt helyezte fókuszba, ezért kevéssé ismert, hogy kanadai CF-18A Hornet vadászbombázók is komoly szerepet kaptak a gyors beavatkozásnak tervezett, végül 78 naposra nyúlt műveletben.  

A kanadai légierő koalíciós szerepvállalása nem volt előzmény nélküli. Vadászpilótáik nyolc évvel korábban, az 1991-es öbölháborúban szereztek tapasztalatot a nagy, többnemzeti kötelékben végrehajtott harci alkalmazásról. A Desert Storm műveletként ismert öbölháborúnak a résztvevők többsége saját elnevezést adott, a kanadai részvétel a Friction nevet kapta. A háború utáni években a kanadai légierő békeidős működésre állt át, az öbölháborús veteránok kikerültek a rendszerből, és a megszerzett tudást az olyan gyakorlatokon igyekeztek hellyel-közzel szinten tartani, mint a hazai Maple Flag vagy az amerikai Red Flag. Közben egy újabb hadművelet lehetősége kezdett kibontakozni, ezúttal a Balkánon.

[...] Bővebben!

Modi’s tough stance could invite—not deter—Chinese aggression.

Misperceptions of the global economy are driving bad policies.

Claudia Sheinbaum has promised to continue outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s security and economic policies.

Selon un observatoire de Microsoft, la Russie a augmenté l'ampleur de sa campagne de désinformation visant les Jeux olympiques de Paris, qui vise notamment à faire monter les craintes d'actes violents durant l'événement. Moscou a réagi mardi, niant toute ingérence et dénonçant une "campagne russophobe dans les médias".

Editor’s Note: The following article is adapted from the introduction to The New Line Institute for Strategy and Policy’s recently published report “Genocide in Tigray: Serious Breaches of International Law and Paths to Accountability” with the permission of the New Lines Institute.

Measured by the estimated number of deaths, the Tigray War in Ethiopia could be the deadliest armed conflict of the twenty-first century and one of the bloodiest since the end of the Cold War. From its outbreak in 2020 to the official ceasefire in 2022, the civil conflict claimed the lives of up to 400,000 soldiers and 300,000 civilians.

Despite the intense human suffering, this “forgotten” war has not garnered the international attention it desperately needs. There is an unfortunate sense in which the world is too ready to move on after its initial efforts. The International Commission of Human Rights Experts on Ethiopia dissolved before concluding its work. The United States, despite recognizing more than half a million deaths in the region and that crimes against humanity and war crimes had been committed there has restored financial and economic assistance to the status quo ante bellum. Similarly, the EU has returned to its $680 million development strategy with the nation despite a lack of accountability for the widespread abuses in the region.

The consequence has been that international efforts to verify serious breaches of international law have not been followed through or adequately supported. Victims will carry with them scarring and abuse from a conflict that, despite an apparent cessation of hostilities in 2022, did not result in a stable peace. Innocent lives continue to be lost, and many millions continue to face food insecurity resulting from military campaigns. More time must be given not only to investigate and, as needed, provide accountability for the blockade on humanitarian aid that contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Tigrayans but also to investigate and provide accountability for the widely-reported mass murder, rape, forced displacement, physical abuse, and torture which took place, as well as the targeting of key civilian infrastructure such as the healthcare system.

The New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy today published a new groundbreaking report on “Genocide in Tigray: Serious Breaches of International Law and Paths to Accountability” with an aim to fill this vacuum by informing stakeholders of the sheer scale and variety of the alleged criminal conduct; providing a legal analysis of the relevant allegations through the particular lens of the Genocide Convention and describing pathways to accountability which should be adopted, including measures at both the national and international levels.

The report was prepared by a group of international law professionals with expertise in fields including international human rights law and international criminal law. While several other reports have reached similar conclusions concerning some of the key factual allegations, the New Lines Institute report is the first to relate these allegations directly to the Genocide Convention and to call for action accordingly.

While the report finds that there is a reasonable basis to believe that all sides committed war crimes in the course of the conflict, Ethiopian and allied forces—specifically, members of the Ethiopian National Defense Force, the Eritrean Defense Forces, and the Amhara Special Forces, among other groups—also appear to have committed crimes against humanity against Tigrayans, as well as acts of genocide.

These acts of genocide include killings, the infliction of serious bodily and mental harm, intentional measures to prevent births, and the deliberate infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of Tigrayans. The report finds, furthermore, that certain individuals also appear to have made statements amounting to direct and public incitement to commit genocide.

Irrespective of whether this apparent conduct by the Ethiopian and allied forces was committed as part of a plan or whether it was supported at senior levels, Ethiopia was obliged as a state party to the Genocide Convention to take effective action to prevent the commission of genocidal acts and to punish such acts if they occurred.

As a consequence, the international community is compelled to act, including potentially by states instituting proceedings before the International Court of Justice under Article IX of the Genocide Convention. The international community should also take steps to secure an international, impartial, and independent criminal investigation, exercise universal jurisdiction where practicable, and thus ensure that justice for the numerous human rights violations is finally done in Tigray.

Dr. Azeem Ibrahim OBE is the Senior Director of Special Initiatives at the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy in Washington, DC. The New Lines Institute report “Genocide in Tigray: Serious Breaches of International Law and Paths to Accountability” can be accessed here.

Image: Rudi Ernst / Shutterstock.com

Depuis samedi, un enregistrement audio circule sur les réseaux sociaux, accusant Emma Rafowicz, candidate de la liste PS aux élections européennes, de tenir des propos génocidaires concernant le peuple palestinien. Ce n’est en fait pas du tout elle qui tient les propos en question. Il s'agit, en fait, d'une manipulation.

Summary: The U.S. Army has received its first M10 Booker combat vehicles from General Dynamics Land Systems, entering low-rate initial production. The new weapons platform would certainly give nations like Russia trouble on any battlefield. 

-Named after two fallen American soldiers, the M10 Booker is designed to enhance the Army's firepower and maneuverability.

-Testing at Fort Liberty, NC, and Fort Stewart, GA, will assess its performance in various conditions.

-The Army plans to acquire 504 units, each costing between $12 million and $14 million, with full-rate production expected to begin next year.

U.S. Army's New M10 Booker Combat Vehicle Begins Testing Phase

The United States Army's new assault vehicle is charging forward. Last month, General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS) announced that it delivered the first M10 Booker Combat Vehicles to the Army, as it reached low-rate initial production (LRIP).

"The M10 Booker is named after two American heroes who gave their lives in service to their country, and we are honored to design, build and deliver these vehicles to the Army," said Gordon Stein, General Dynamics Land Systems vice president and general manager for U.S. operations in a May 15, 2024 statement. "These latest Bookers incorporate improvements and lessons we learned from the Middle Tier Acquisition phase of the program, and we’re confident that Soldiers will find them highly useful in completing their missions."

The LRIP will support the U.S. Army's testing and logistic efforts, which will determine any modifications that may need to be made to the platform. Breaking Defense reported that the initial units will be sent to Fort Liberty, North Carolina, and put to the tests later this summer with the 82nd Airborne Division before some of the M10s then head to Fort Stewart, Georgia for additional gunnery training and testing.

"We will also put the vehicle through production qualification and testing in desert, arctic, temperate and tropical conditions, challenging it with obstacles like gaps and walls to scale, and engaging it with real word threats to ensure its survivability," said Maj. Gen. Glenn Dean, program executive officer for Ground Combat Systems, in an April U.S. Army press release.

Early next year, the Booker will then head to an Initial Operational Test and Evaluation (IOT&E) event to finalize any near-term and long-term modifications that GDLS will need to make. That will move the program forward, with the tracked vehicle on track to reach a full-rate production contract that could be awarded in the second quarter of next year.

Citing budget requests, Breaking Defense further reported that the U.S. Army eyes acquiring 504 M10 Bookers, with the initial vehicles costing between $12 million and $14 million.

A New Light Tank?

Originally initiated as the Mobile Protected Firepower Vehicle (MPFV), it was officially designated the M10 last year – while it honors two different soldiers named Booker.

The first was Medal of Honor recipient Private Robert Booker of the 133rd Infantry Regiment, 34th Infantry Division, who was killed on April 9, 1943, near Fondouk, Tunisia, during the Second World War; while the latter was tank commander and Distinguished Service Cross recipient Staff Sergeant Stevon Booker, Company A, 1st Battalion, 64th Armored Regiment, 2nd Brigade Combat Team, 3rd Infantry Division, who was killed in April 5, 2003, during Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"The Army is undertaking its most significant transformation in several decades to dominate in large-scale combat operations in a multidomain environment, and the M10 Booker is a crucial part of that transformation," added Doug Bush, the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology, in the April release.

The M10 Booker: More Than a Light Tank

The GDLS prototype beat out a design from BAE Systems in 2022. It is the first major combat vehicle developed for the U.S. Army since the late stages of the Cold War in the 1980s. The finalized M10 Booker is operated by a crew of four, including a commander, a driver, a gunner, and a loader.

Its main armament is the XM35 105mm cannon, while it is also armed with a 7.62mm coaxial machine gun, .50 caliber M2 commander's machine gun, and is further equipped with the Abrams primary weapon sight, smoke grenade launchers, blowoff panels, and an automatic fire suppression system. Those features are intended to increase the survivability against both direct and indirect fire, including from rocket-propelled grenades and improvised explosive devices (IEDs). The M10 can reach a top speed of 40 miles per hour, while two Bookers can be transported on the C-17 cargo plane.

It is now undergoing testing and will soon allow soldiers to move at a faster pace, and protect an assault force in a variety of terrains.

Author Experience and Expertise: Peter Suciu

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer. He has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites with over 3,200 published pieces over a twenty-year career in journalism. He regularly writes about military hardware, firearms history, cybersecurity, politics, and international affairs. Peter is also a Contributing Writer for Forbes and Clearance Jobs. You can follow him on Twitter: @PeterSuciu. You can email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

Summary: The U.S. Air Force's B-1B Lancer and the Soviet Tu-160 "Blackjack" are among the largest, fastest bombers, but they were designed with different philosophies.

-The B-1B, intended for low-level penetration to avoid radar, has been adapted for tactical support roles. Conversely, the Tu-160, designed for high-speed, high-altitude missions, has a greater takeoff weight but less payload diversity.

-Both aircraft have been modernized: the B-1B for supporting roles and the Tu-160M as a stopgap until Russia's PAK-DA stealth bomber is operational.

B-1B Lancer vs. Tu-160 Blackjack: A Tale of Two Supersonic Bombers

The U.S. Air Force’s B-1B Lancer “Bone” and the Tu-160 “Blackjack” of Soviet manufacture are known for being some of the largest, fastest bombers ever. 

At first glance, they appear nearly identical. Closer inspection, however, reveals that while the design considerations and technology available at the time of their creation meant they looked quite alike, the two aircraft were designed with different philosophies in mind. 

Introducing the B-1B

The B-1B was conceived in the 1960s as an attempt to marry the range and payload of the B-52 with the speed of the B-58. Technology had improved throughout the 1950s, and the U.S. Air Force recognized that speed and altitude were no longer the only safe defense for strategic bombers. 

Interceptor aircraft were long the only available tool able to attack bombers, and they could not match the high ceilings and top speeds of aircraft like the XB-70 Valkyrie. But then surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) were introduced. The shootdown of Gary Powers’ U-2 in 1960 by a SAM caused the Air Force to rethink its bombing doctrine, swapping high-altitude penetration for low-level ingress.

Flying at low level allows aircraft to take advantage of terrain masking. It breaks line of sight to the radar station, which struggles to get a return on the aircraft. Radar at the time was limited by ground clutter – false returns off of objects on the ground that rendered them useless below a certain elevation. 

For aircraft like the Valkyrie that were optimized for high-altitude flight, though, operations in the thick air down low made them inefficient and ineffective. 

The Department of Defense in the 1960s commissioned multiple studies on the feasibility and potential design of a low-altitude penetrator. Rockwell was awarded the B-1A development contract in 1970 and ultimately produced a variable-wing bomber capable of extended operations at low speeds, around Mach 0.85, but able to make a high-speed Mach 2.0 “dash” past Soviet defenses. 

Work continued throughout the 1970s, but the B-1A was canceled in 1977 due to improvements in ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as the forthcoming B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, which rendered the B-1A obsolete. 

In 1981, President Ronald Reagan revived the program. Returning as the B-1B, it was now intended to bridge the gap between the aging B-52 fleet and the B-2, which faced delays. 

Introducing Russia's Tu-160 Bomber

Around the same time, the Soviet Union was finalizing plans for its supersonic strategic bomber. It too had begun work as early as the 1960s, but it was ultimately the revival of the B-1 program that prompted Soviet planners to begin production of the Tu-160.

Like the Bone, the Blackjack features variable geometry or “swing” wings, giving it better performance across the range of its flight envelope. It is much larger than its counterpart: 30 feet longer and with a takeoff weight 130,000 lbs greater.

Unlike the B-1B, the Tu-160 was never designed as a low-level bomber. Its top speed of Mach 2.0 far outstrips the Mach 1.25 of the B-1B, whose top speed was reduced as part of cost-cutting measures when the program was revived in the 1980s. 

Furthermore, while it does have a greater takeoff weight, the Tu-160’s payload capability is less diverse, as it only has two bomb bays with rotating launcher racks. The Bone has three bomb bays as well as optional pylons. It can also be fitted with a sniper targeting pod for air support missions. 

While the B-1B spent the 1990s and 2000s being modified into more of a support bomber, the Tu-160 has seen a revival of its own with the Tu-160M program. These bombers have upgraded airframes and avionics and give a major boost to the Russian long-range air fleet. Much as happened decades ago to the B-1B, the Tu-160M was approved in part as a stopgap measure until the PAK-DA stealth bomber is ready.

While the B-1B’s orientation changed over its lifetime toward more of a tactical support bombing role, advances in adversary air defenses mean it will most likely be limited to firing stand-off weapons and air-launched cruise missiles in any future conflict. In doing so, it will be carrying out the same mission as the Tu-160.

About the Author: Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin. Email the author: Editor@nationalinterest.org.

Summary: The U.S. Army accepted delivery of the M10 Booker combat vehicle in April, marking the occasion with a christening ceremony.

-Designed to enhance infantry brigades, the M10 Booker provides advanced lethality and protection.

-Only three units have been delivered so far, with comprehensive testing to follow.

-This includes evaluations in diverse environments and real-world obstacles.

-The vehicle, resulting from the Army's rapid acquisition pathway, is expected to be operational by summer 2025.

-Although it resembles a tank, the Army refers to it as a "combat vehicle," sparking debate among enthusiasts.

U.S. Army Welcomes M10 Booker: A New Era in Combat Vehicle

The U.S. Army in April accepted delivery of its newest combat vehicle, the M10 Booker. To commemorate the moment, the Army held a christening ceremony on April 18 at the Aberdeen Proving Ground. 

“The M10 Booker represents a new modernized capability for the Army, allowing light maneuvers forces to overmatch adversaries,” the Army said in a statement.

So far, just three M10 Bookers have been delivered to the Army. The new vehicle is expected to supplement the precision firepower of infantry brigades. The Army boasts that the M10 “without a doubt brings a new level of lethality and protection to our infantry forces and will allow our infantry soldiers to gain and maintain the speed and momentum that is critical on the modern battlefield.”

Doug Bush, the Army’s assistant secretary for acquisition, logistics, and technology, heralded the M10 with non-specific platitudes: “The Army is undertaking the most significant transformation in several decades to dominate in large-scale combat operations in a multidomain environment, and the M10 Booker is a crucial part of that transformation.”

Testing the M10 Booker

For two years, the Army will exhaustively test the new M10 Booker. Testing will include high-volume firing and long-distance driving – all to better understand the vehicle’s reliability and durability. 

The M10 Booker will also be tested for effectiveness in different environments – specifically in desert, arctic, temperate, and tropical conditions. The M10 Booker will also test against real-world obstacles like gaps and walls, to see how well the vehicle will perform in the field, where any sort of battleground obstruction is possible.

The 82nd Airborne Division will be responsible for testing the M10 Booker for the next few months, with the hopes that an operational company outfitted with the vehicle will be ready for service in the summer of 2025.

The M10 Booker is the result of the Army’s Middle Tier of Acquisition pathway, which is used to develop “fieldable prototypes” and “production quantities” rapidly. According to the Army, the “M10 Booker is a benchmark modernization program, as the acquisition and requirement communities worked together to move this system into production in just under four years.”

What Is the M10 Booker?

There is debate over what exactly the new platform is. The vehicle looks like a tank – yet the Army has been reluctant to call the thing a tank. Doug Bush, for example, called the M10 a “combat vehicle” and refused to enter the “esoteric and borderline religious debate among the armored community about what [the word tank] means.”

Bush’s comments were not entirely well received. An online community of tank enthusiasts took one look at the M10, which features armor, a pivoting gun turret, and tracks, and said you could call the M10 whatever you want, but the thing is obviously a tank.

Military Times weighed in last June with a headline suggesting that the M10 is a tank: “The Army’s M10 Booker is a tank. Prove us wrong.”

What do you think?

About the Author: Harrison Kass 

Harrison Kass is a defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.

All images are Creative Commons. 

Summary: Russian forces are set to enhance their aerial capabilities with increased production of Su-35 and Su-57 fighter jets from the Komsomolsk-on-Amur plant.

-Despite these additions, the Su-35, a modernized version of the Su-27 Flanker, has faced significant losses in the Ukraine conflict, particularly against Western-supplied air defense systems like the Patriot missiles.

-The Su-35 boasts advanced features and weaponry but has struggled to maintain superiority in combat.

-With nearly 350 Russian aircraft reportedly lost since the invasion began, the sustainability of Russia’s air force remains in question.

According to reports from the Komsomolsk-on-Amur plant, a steady uptick in the production of Su-35 and Su-57 fighters will bolster the Russian Aerospace Forces’ capabilities. While extra airframes will certainly help replenish Moscow’s hard-hit fleet amid its invasion of Ukraine, Su-35s have not performed well in the conflict. Armed with sophisticated Western-delivered weaponry, Ukrainian forces have shot down many of these Soviet-era fighters. 

The Ukrainian Defense Ministry announced that its forces had shot down at least seven Sukhoi glide-bombers earlier this year using American-made Patriot missiles. The Kremlin takes every chance it gets to tout its “fourth generation ++” fighters as superior jets, but they have yet to prove that title.

An Overview of the Su-35

Moscow’s twin-engine supermaneuverable Su-35 platform is an evolution of the Soviet Su-27 Flanker. The Soviet planners who oversaw the program wanted a new fighter capable of going up against American fourth-generation jets like the McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle and Northrop Grumman F-14 Tomcat. 

The first Su-35 prototype (initially known as the Su-27M) took its maiden flight in the early 1980s. As the platform progressed over the years, NATO gave it the moniker “Flanker-E.” Manufacturer United Aircraft Corporation describes the Su-35 as an airframe that “combines the qualities of a modern fighter (super-maneuverability, superior active and passive acquisition aids, high supersonic speed and long range, capability of managing battle group actions, etc.) and a good tactical airplane (wide range of weapons that can be carried, modern multi-channel electronic warfare system, reduced radar signature, and high combat survivability).”

Equipped with a dozen hardpoints for carrying external weapons and stores, the Flanker-E is a well armed platform. The fighter can carry a range of air-to-air and air-to-surface missiles, including the Vympel R-27, Molniya Kh-29, and the long-range Kh-58UShE. The Su-35 can launch the KAB-500Kr, KAB-1500Kr TV, and the KAB-1500LG laser-guided bomb. As detailed by Airforce Technology, the Russian platform also features countermeasures like a jammer and a radar warning system, and the Gryazev-Shipunov 30mm GSh-30-1 gun. 

How Has the Flanker-E Fared in Ukraine?

Considering these specs and capabilities, the Flanker-E certainly should not be underestimated. However, these jets have suffered greatly in Ukraine. They are vulnerable to many Western air defense systems. In February alone, Moscow lost at least six of its 120 Su-35 airframes. According to Forbes, the rate at which Russia is losing its Flanker-E jets is “accelerating” and becoming “unsustainable.” 

Ukraine’s supply of Patriot missiles is not infinite, though, so the country’s defense against Russian airframes might diminish down the line. 

The Flanker-E is not the only Russian fighter struggling in the ongoing invasion. The General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has claimed the destruction of nearly 350 Russian aircraft since the war began back in February 2022. While this number cannot be exactly verified, documentation and footage suggest that Russia’s aerial fleet has shrunk significantly. 

About the Author: Maya Carlin

Maya Carlin, National Security Writer with The National Interest, is an analyst with the Center for Security Policy and a former Anna Sobol Levy Fellow at IDC Herzliya in Israel. She has by-lines in many publications, including The National Interest, Jerusalem Post, and Times of Israel. You can follow her on Twitter: @MayaCarlin. 

All images are from Shutterstock. 

GRAND ENTRETIEN - Pour la tête de liste des Républicains, les élections européennes doivent permettre de bâtir un «vrai contre-pouvoir». Très critique à l’égard d’Emmanuel Macron, le candidat se dit « fier » de sa campagne.