Diplomacy & Crisis News

Summary and Key Points: The U.S. Air Force's B-21 Raider program is advancing amidst the global race to develop sixth-generation stealth bombers. While the B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress, and B-1 Lancer remain formidable, the B-21's timely introduction is essential for maintaining long-range strike capabilities. But can the B-21 Raider overcome what some consider possible future cost issues? 

-Recent negotiations have reduced the per-unit cost, making the Raider more economically viable.

-Designed to be undetectable and equipped with modular systems for future upgrades, the B-21 is crucial for U.S. national security.

-As China and Russia advance their bomber programs, the Raider's development ensures the U.S. retains a strategic edge in aerial warfare.

U.S. B-21 Raider: Reducing Costs Amidst Global Stealth Bomber Race

The race to produce the world’s first sixth-generation stealth bomber is on. As the United States moves to introduce its B-21 Raider, China and Russia continue to develop their H-20 and PAK-DA programs. 

The United States has long fielded superior bombers. The B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress, and B-1 Lancer are still lethal aircraft, providing the U.S. Air Force with long-range strike and deterrence capabilities. But the Raider’s timely introduction is crucial, and while some analysts argue that the B-21 program is too expensive to justify, the new bomber is worth the high price tag.

Cost is Decreasing

Following negotiations between the Air Force and manufacturer Northrop Grumman, the per-unit cost of the B-21 Raider has gone down. This was first reported back several months ago. 

The service’s secretary, Frank Kendall, told the Senate Appropriations subcommittee months ago that the cost decline indicates negotiations are headed in the right direction. The Raider program was expected to cost roughly $692 million per unit in 2022 when the bomber debuted. While the Air Force has yet to announce the specific decrease in price, the service has said that lower costs will not mean lower procurement rates.

While this news is positive for Raider advocates, Northrop has yet to comment on Kendall’s remarks. The manufacturer reported a hefty charge on the Raider program toward the end of 2023, citing increased production costs and other economic disruptions. Kendall has warned that “[I]’ve seen programs get into trouble because there was too much focus on the platform and not enough on all the things that are necessary to support it,” adding that “hopefully, we will have avoided that in the case of the B-21.”

Around this time, the Pentagon’s undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, William LaPlante, said that the Raider would be produced at an intentionally low rate in case of looming budgetary cuts. He also noted that lessons learned from the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter program brought about new measures to ensure lower costs and a smoother production process.

What We Know About the B-21 Raider Program

The Raider is designed to be the Air Force’s intelligence collection platform, battle manager, and interceptor aircraft. In 2022, the Raider was officially unveiled at Northrop’s production facilities in Palmdale, California.

Smaller than its Spirit predecessor, the B-21 will be more difficult for enemy aircraft and radar to detect—an essential attribute.

The new bomber is also expected to incorporate modular systems that will enable upgrades to the airframe as new technologies emerge—similar to the F-35 Lightning II.

Regardless of the Raider’s final price tag, this new bomber fleet is essential to U.S. national security. Its timely introduction is crucial, considering the progress Beijing has made toward its own H-20 stealth bomber. As U.S. defense secretary Lloyd Austin said during the unveiling of the Raider: “America’s defense will always be rooted in deterring conflict. So we are again making it plain to any potential foe that the risk and the cost of aggression far outweigh any conceivable gains.”

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 Creative Commons and/or Shutterstock. 

Many U.S. allies expressed gratitude for the president’s friendship and support.

Les différents lieux indiqués sur cette carte sont explorés dans les articles de ce numéro de Manière de voir. / Monde, Infrastructures, Transports - Espace et territoire / Monde, Infrastructures, Transports - Espace et territoire

A conversation with Timothy Naftali.

A region in name only.

To temper Beijing’s ambitions, Washington should threaten to share weapons with Japan and South Korea.

The Italian Parliament in Rome recently hosted a conference entitled “The Peace Project in Ukraine” to discuss the various options for resolving the Ukraine conflict and ending the suffering of the civilian population there.    This follows Pope Francis proclaiming, “We must have the courage to negotiate.”   Monsignor Fabrizio Turriziani Colonna, Judicial Vicar of the Catholics of Armenia, Georgia, Russia and Eastern Europe, continued; “Negotiation is never surrender.  It requires courage.  Achieving peace entails making sacrifices.  Relinquishing personal principals or specific rights in favor of broader, universal ones.” 

He called for there to be action to start direct negotiations between Russia and the Ukraine: “The Pope stated that in order to achieve peace, we must construct a bridge.  But to construct a bridge, we must sacrifice something.  In Christian culture, there is ultimately no such thing as a just war.   It may be acknowledged that a war could be inevitable.  However, it can never be termed as just.  A peace project can only succeed through dialogue, creating a bridge where opposing positions can converge, albeit requiring concessions for the greater good.”  

Manel Msalmi, President of the European Association for the Defense of Minorities andan  advocate of women’s rights, discussed the plight of women and children in the Ukraine and the grave losses caused by the war, as well as the need to focus on the education of young people who have not been learning for four years. She mentioned that the Swiss talks have not brought a solution because Ukraine and Russia need to be brought to the negotiating table through mediators. Saudi Arabia and some other countries are already trying to bring Ukraine and Russia together. However, she believes “it would be more effective if Europe were to lead this process, as the conflict is being fought on European soil”. She also mentioned a threat of this spiraling out of control into a nuclear war.

Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Infrastructure Tullio Ferrante stated that “the establishment of a permanent dialogue with all members of the international community is crucial, as a just peace can only be achieved while preserving the territorial integrity of Ukraine. At the same time, it is essential to continue humanitarian support funded by military and reconstruction operations for Ukraine”.

Professor Jeffrey Sachs from Columbia University pointed out the economic impact of the war on Europe and the world and emphasized the need to avoid an escalation and talk about peace. “The EU must not accept Putin’s terms, but must be prepared to negotiate,” he said. Sachs also explained that the expansion of NATO could be a mistake for the West and that it will be wise to have countries with neutral status between NATO and Russia instead of on two sides of one border. In his opinion, the Italian people are characterized by their independent thinking, which is why he expects them to think about negotiating peace with Russia.

Member of the Chamber of Deputies Francesco Maria Rubano, Senator Francesco Silvestro and Magistrate Catello Maresca also pointed out the terrible consequences of the ongoing war and the need to establish peace. Despite the different views on the right way to end the war, the participants declared their intention to bring peace and stability to Europe.

 

An attempted assassination of Trump is part of a global trend.

To avoid a spiral of violence, America must help stabilize the greater Horn of Africa.

En remplaçant la distance par le temps, on fait apparaître une France redessinée par le chemin de fer au cours du XIXe siècle. À l'époque des diligences, le (long) temps de trajet pour gagner les villes les plus périphériques était quasiment proportionnel à la distance à vol d'oiseau : la carte (...) / France, Transports, Ville, Région, Service public - Espace et territoire

/ Europe, Transports, Région, Services - Espace et territoire / Europe, Transports, Région, Services - Espace et territoire

/ France, Transports, Service public, Région - Espace et territoire / France, Transports, Service public, Région - Espace et territoire

The Supreme Court eliminated the last remaining checks on executive power.

Reinforcing the bargain that strengthens security while expanding peaceful use.

Indian Produced T-90 Mk.III, a licensed and improved version of the Russian T-90 tank.

The War in Ukraine was largely unexpected from both allies of Ukraine as well as many Russian commanders themselves as little to no new weaponry was produced in large quantities prior to the beginning of the conflict. Leadership in Russia likely assumed that the assault on Kyiv would be swift and that trench style warfare would not take place in an era with rapid, modern tanks and armoured vehicles linked to GPS. The end result was trenches and drones and long range artillery with accuracy only dreamed of in the 1980s. While most of the Soviet stockpile was made to fight a Third World War in the late 70s and early 80s, it is now almost depleted in the mid-2020s.

Russia had large stockpiles of Soviet equipment in garages and sitting in fields all over Russia by the mid-2020s. Newer modern systems are often based on the late Cold War platforms with computer assisted communications and targeting equipment, designed to be an export product to nations who were looking for an economical, world class platform. When Russia lost many of these more advanced systems, they started taking equipment from their active reserves, then from working tanks from their stockpile, then upgrading the Soviet tanks to a modern standard, and now taking even 1960s era systems with an odd 115mm calibre to use as fire support for infantry. Russia has gone as far as purchasing weapons and ammunition from North Korea, much of it being of an older Soviet design and with additional problems due to quality controls. The race for modern tanks however may not be solved through these purchases, and both the Western allies and Russia may both have the option to purchase the last remaining large stockpiles of tanks for their forces in Ukraine.

Russia had a modernisation program based on the T14 Armata tank’s hull and chassis to re-equip their armed forces. The Armata platform would be utilized with new tanks and vehicles with the best technology and protection available in the post 2010s era. With the cost of the Armata being quite high however, and the requirements for the current war being one of needing more units as opposed to a few highly advanced units, it looks like the modernisation program will be focused on older models as opposed to a newly produced Armata based production. While the production for the T-80 series appears to no longer have the rationale past upgrades to make new tanks, the factory that produced the original T-72 has been working 24 hours shifts modernizing older tanks from storage to the T-72B3M standard and would likely focus on making the newer T-90M tanks if a new production run would take shape. Even with this large production push, Russia is still losing too many tanks, and both Russia and Ukraine will need to find a source of tanks that are significantly better than old T-62Ms and Leopard 1s.

The largest stockpiles of modern weapons that might be available for purchase lay in China and India. If China would decide to disengage from accelerating a conflict with Taiwan and continue as the world’s manufacturing hub, PLA land forces would be in excess of equipment and armour. China had to design the ZTQ15 light tank as it could operate effectively for use on the border with India, where many of their ZTZ99A and ZTZ96B tanks would struggle in a low oxygen/high terrain environment. After China’s 2008 Parade showing many new weapons systems to the public, many of these systems ended up being retired or put in rear units of the PLA after a few short years, despite being of a modern 2008 design. Tanks such as the ZTZ96B has similar characteristics to the newer T-72 versions and would suit both Russian and Ukrainian forces well in their conflict. Anti-aircraft systems like China’s PGZ-04A/PGZ95 is already largely being replaced by the PGZ09, and is like a modernised ZSU-23-4 Shilka, and would suit the anti-drone defence for Ukraine better than most of the early 80s Gepards currently being used. While it might be considered as a long shot to purchase armament from China for Ukraine, there have been many licensing agreements and commercial connections between Ukraine’s allies, particularly France and Germany, and it cannot be assumed that China would forgo a benefit to themselves for the sake of Russia in every instance. With China’s equipment being standard with many Soviet era artillery rounds, both Ukraine and Russia could integrate those systems with ease on the battlefield.

India’s currently has the license to produce the Russian designed T-90 tank and has production facilities making them in India for India’s armed forces. While it is unclear whether or not Russia has the ability to block exports of the Indian produced T-90 in their licensing agreement, India’s security situation requires an independent source for arms in the event its population is threatened. Due to India’s significance in its region and globally, they have been able to maintain relations with both sides of the conflict without enduring much pressure from either party. Besides equipment from France, India’s military has always sourced much of its equipment from non-NATO nations despite being the world’s largest democracy and having close ties to the West and its values. India has recently backed away from purchasing some modern Russian equipment after seeing the performance of the T-72/T-90 platform in Ukraine. India may be willing to sell part of its T-90 production if it can be compensated with other platforms as countries like Poland had chosen to do in displacing its T-72 based PT-91 Twardy tanks. While relational issues India might have with the West or Russia in selling T-90s to either side would be a topic of debate, any increased immediate threat to India, the region, or the larger world from India’s adversaries will push India to rapidly and unapologetically support its own best interests. India has already taken to supplying some weapons support to Armenia, even when Armenia has been abandoned by both traditional ally Russia, and the United States as the new player in the Caucasus region.

It may be the case that the usefulness of the traditional tank, with a large 125mm cannon and heavy ammunition, may not be the best system to use on the battlefield with so many threats from below the ground to nearly invisible drones above. Many weapons systems like the M2 Bradley use an autocannon to achieve its mission success and rely on speed, rapid fire and crew visibility in assaulting enemy positions and even challenging tanks themselves. The offensive use of Anti-Tank guided missiles can destroy most modern tanks and active and passive protection systems can be effective on systems using thinner armour. The Russian system called BMPT Terminator uses two BMP-2 style autocannons and four anti-tank missiles based on a T-72 hull designed as a response to tanks losses experienced in urban settings in Chechnya. This system uses modern vision and targeting equipment, and was initially one of the most feared systems to be encountered in Ukraine. These lighter systems may take over the role of the main battle tanks in future conflicts. The idea of having unmanned armoured vehicles may already be fielded in Ukraine. The Russian Uran-9 is essentially a drone armoured vehicle with an autocannon and anti-tank missiles akin to something you might see in an 1980s sci-fi movie, minus the growling and creepy voice. While many of these manned and unmanned tanks will be integrated with their own aerial drone support mechanisms, the war in Ukraine has established certain technologies over others, and will continue to do so as long as fighting continues in the region. We are at the cusp of the final stockpiles from the end of the Cold War, with no signs of less conflict in the world in 2024.

/ France, Transports, Ville, Service public, Région - Espace et territoire / France, Transports, Ville, Service public, Région - Espace et territoire

Helping it recover is the only way to save the two-state solution.

America must rediscover the ideological flexibility that helped it win the Cold War.

La rénovation de la gare Saint-Lazare, achevée en 2012, a transformé un peu plus cette cathédrale du voyage en temple du commerce. En s'associant à la SNCF, le groupe d'immobilier commercial Klepierre a envahi un espace public fréquenté par plus de 137 millions de personnes en 2022. Nouveaux étages, (...) / France, Transports, Infrastructures, Service public, Ville - Espace et territoire