Diplomacy & Crisis News

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a devastating impact on women and girls, and the fallout has shown how deeply gender inequality remains embedded in the world’s political, social and economic systems, UN chief António Guterres said in his address to the Commission on the Status of Women, on Monday. This year’s Commission will focus on charting a global roadmap towards achieving full equality in public life but, as Mr. Guterres recalled in his speech, gender equality in all walks of life is a long way off and has been further undermined by the pandemic.

Caleb Larson

Submarines, Eurasia

The Severodvinsk is incredibly advanced.

Here's What You Need to Know: During a conflict, losing track of a submarine is deadly.

In 2018, the Russian Navy’s most advanced submarine, the Severodvinsk, slipped into the Atlantic. For weeks the U.S. Navy couldn’t find it. Here’s why. 

Yasen-class

The Yasen-class is Russia’s most advanced nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine. The first of the class, the Severodvinsk, was commissioned into the Russian Navy in 2013 or 2014. 

One of the U.S. Navy’s top submarine officers was so impressed with the Severodvinsk that he had a model made for his office to remind him what the United States Navy is up against. 

Talking about naval threats from Russia, Rear Admiral Dave Johnson said “We’ll be facing tough potential opponents. One only has to look at the Severodvinsk, Russia’s version of a [nuclear-guided missile submarine] (SSGN). I am so impressed with this ship that I had Carderock build a model from unclassified data.” 

The Whole Shebang

The Severodvinsk is incredibly advanced and leverages some technologies that the Soviet Union researched in the 1980s. It has a large spherical sonar array in the bow that is thought to be very sensitive. 

Because of the sonar’s large size, the torpedo tubes were moved from the nose to a position amidships near the submarine’s sail and are aimed at a forward angle. The Severodvinsk’s torpedo tubes are a mix of standard 533 millimeter and 650-millimeter heavyweight torpedos. 

The Severodvinsk’s hull is made of non or low-magnetic steel, which either significantly reduces or eliminates the Severodvinsk’s magnetic signature. 

Soviet (and now Russian) submarines have favored a double hull design in the past in which a hydrodynamic outer hull encapsulates a stronger inner pressure hull. The Severodvinsk uses a hybrid design, the outer hull only partially covers the inner hull. 

There is a high degree of automation in the Severodvinsk, and the sub’s crew complement is consequently small—just sixty-five sailors and officers. 

In addition to missiles, the Severodvinsk has twenty-four tubes aft of the sail that can carry the P-800 Onyx anti-ship missiles or nuclear-capable Granat missiles.

The Severodvinsk will be armed with Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missiles, a first in submarine armament.

Silent as a Mouse

In an interview with 60 Minutes, a U.S. Navy Admiral said that Russia has a “very capable submarine force,” and that increased Russian submarine activity gives him pause.

Talking about the Severodvinsk specifically, the Admiral said that the Severodvinsk is “a brand new class of submarine, and it’s very capable, and it’s very quiet, so that’s the most important thing I think, in submarine warfare.”

Although he would not comment on reports that the U.S. Navy lost the Severodvinsk, Pentagon officials said that the Severodvinsk went into the Atlantic Ocean in 2018—and managed to evade detection for weeks.

During peacetime, losing a Russian submarine is a headache. During a conflict, losing track of a submarine is deadly.

Caleb Larson holds a Master of Public Policy degree from the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy. He lives in Berlin and writes on U.S. and Russian foreign and defense policy, German politics, and culture.

This article first appeared in April 2020.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Peter Suciu

P-35,

The fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter has been noted for being a major leap forward in aviation design, and long before that aircraft took flight there was the Seversky P-35, an aircraft that was the forerunner of the Republic P-47.

The fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter has been noted for being a major leap forward in aviation design, and long before that aircraft took flight there was the Seversky P-35, an aircraft that was the forerunner of the Republic P-47.

Developed in the early 1930s, the aircraft was actually a contemporary of the U.K.'s Hawker Hurricane and Germany's Messerschmitt Bf 109 and was the first United States Army Air Corps (USAAC's) single-seat fighter to feature all-metal construction, retractable landing gear, and an enclosed cockpit. It might not have been stealth, but in the 1930s it was truly an innovative aircraft.

It was developed as part of a collaborative effort between Alexander P. de Seversky and Alexander Kartveli of The Seversky Aircraft Corporation, and it was derived from the Seversky SEV-3, which had set a record for piston-engine amphibious aircraft reaching 230 mph.

The P-35 was powered by a single Pratt & Whitney R-1830 engine that provided 850 horsepower and gave the aircraft a maximum speed of 280 mph and a cruising speed of 260 mph. It was armed with both a .50 caliber machine gun and a .30 caliber machine gun mounted in the fuselage, and it could carry up to 320 pounds of bombs.

The USAAC accepted seventy-six of the P-35s in 1937 and 1938 and assigned all but one of those aircraft to the 1st Pursuit Group, which was based at Selfridge Field, Michigan. When the P-35 was introduced in 1937 at a highly publicized event, it was presented as an aircraft that would provide the United States military with aerial superiority over any potential adversary. However, such boast greatly exaggerated the P-35's capabilities, and the aircraft's actual performance was considered poor by contemporary standards and it was essentially obsolete by the time the final aircraft were delivered – although USAAC aviators found the plane's ruggedness to be its greatest attribution.

Due to production delays, the USAAC opted to purchase 210 Curtiss P-36 Hawks. Matters were made worse by the fact that Seversky sold twenty of the two-seat fighter-bomber 2PA variant to the Imperial Japanese Navy in 1939 – and those became the only American-built aircraft used operationally by the Japanese during World War II.

As a result, the Seversky Aircraft Corporation ended up looking to export the remainder of the 196 P-35s that were built. Alexander P. de Seversky even headed to Europe to find a buyer for the aircraft but only Sweden placed an order. While originally one hundred and twenty were ordered, only sixty of the improved variant, designated the EP-106, were eventually delivered due to a June 1940  U.S. embargo of aircraft sales to Europe other than to Great Britain.

Instead many of the final batch of P-35s were sent to the Far East Air Force in the Philippines beginning in February 1941, and those aircraft didn't fare well against the Japanese fighters in the early stages of America's entry into World War II. All were lost in action, and as for Seversky he was fired from the company by the board of directors and the company was rebranded Republic Aviation – and it went on to create the truly revolutionary P-47 Thunderbolt.

A handful of P-35s eventually saw service with the Colombian Air Force and the Ecuadorian Air Force and most that were destroyed in combat during the war simply rusted away. Today there are three original surviving aircraft including one at the Swedish Air Force Museum; one at the Planes of Fame Air Museum at the Chino Airport, California; and one in the collection of the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Peter Suciu

USS New Jersey,

As in visits from tourists: One of the most powerful battleships ever built for the U.S. Navy is getting a much-needed refurbishment – and it isn't to her weapons systems or sensors, but rather the decking.

One of the most powerful battleships ever built for the U.S. Navy is getting a much-needed refurbishment – and it isn't to her weapons systems or sensors, but rather the decking.

The Battleship New Jersey Memorial and Museum, which is located on the Camden waterfront on the Delaware River across from Philadelphia, will be getting some much-needed brotherly love in the form of a $500,000 Preserve New Jersey Historic Preservation Fund Grant, state officials announced.

The money will be used to address the issue of the deck of the USS New Jersey (BB-62), the Iowa-class battleship that has been a museum ship since the autumn of 2000. The ship, which is on several historic registers, was previously part of the U.S. Navy's mothball fleet, until the New Jersey State Review Board for Historic Sites recommended that it "be listed in the New Jersey Register of Historic Places, contingent upon the transfer of the battleship to New Jersey waters."

While the most decorated of the Iowa-class battleships, New Jersey won the most battle stars for combat actions, and was the only U.S. battleship to provide gunfire support during the Vietnam War. However, time and weather have been the biggest threat to the ship affectionately known as "Big J" or the "Black Dragon." All four of the Navy's World War II Iowa-class battleships were converted to museum ships with USS Missouri now in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; USS Iowain Los Angeles, California; and USS Wisconsin in Norfolk, Virginia – USS New Jersey arguably must deal with the worst extremes that include the cold winters and hot summers along the Delaware River.

Visitors to the warship have had to deal with dings and holes in the rotted wood of the deck, which has been replaced in a piecemeal fashion since 2015 due to limited funds. Some sections had gotten so bad that it was considered a serious trip hazard. The decking was last replaced and upgraded before the Vietnam War. The original decking had been teak, but that is expensive so staff and carpenters have opted to find creative ways to cut down on its use while still retaining the historic integrity of the deck.

"This is a very exciting day for the Trust and Battleship New Jersey who are once again teaming up to preserve one of the most treasured and widely visited historic places in New Jersey," the state's Lt. Gov. Sheila Oliver, who also serves as Department of Community Affairs commissioner, told Patch.com earlier this month. "This grant round is going to breathe new life into the Battleship New Jersey's ongoing preservation work as well as to other heritage tourism sites throughout the state."

Battleship New Jersey has been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic and was closed to visitors since August. It recently resumed limited weekend tours and maintained social distancing.

The majority of the museum's income, or $1.5 million, come from grants including New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

 

Terry Campo

Politics, Americas

While Garland’s lack of clear answers at his committee hearing has understandably raised some eyebrows, it is still important that everyone look at the new attorney general with some perspective.

The Senate voted to confirm Merrick Garland as the United States’ eighty-sixth attorney general on Wednesday. He was formally sworn in as the chief law officer on Thursday.

Most of the news and opinion coverage surrounding President Joseph Biden’s initial nomination of Garland centered around whether he could restore the public’s faith in the Department of Justice. Understandably so. From accusations of the Trump administration’s DOJ unduly intervening in the criminal and antitrust cases of the president’s allies to one of the Obama administration’s attorney generals categorizing himself as a wing-man of the president, politicization of the Justice Department has seemingly grown too commonplace in recent years. Will Garland manage to convince the public that integrity, accountability, and law and order are still the driving forces behind the DOJ’s operations?

Without question, the respected federal judge and former prosecutor has the experience and qualifications needed to achieve this goal. He has built a strong reputation as a centrist with a commitment to fairness and equity. That is why he received the bipartisan support of the Senate Judiciary Committee and ultimately received a roll call vote on the Senate Floor a week early. That said, there is still reason to be concerned that Garland may continue prioritizing politics over the rule of law at the DOJ.

At his two-day confirmation hearing, Garland would not commit to ensuring any possible Biden administration links to “big tech” will not influence his DOJ’s decisionmaking.

A diverse coalition of Democratic and Republican legislators have noted that they are worried about Biden’s appointment of technology executives to key White House positions. Perhaps these concerns have merit; perhaps they do not. Regardless, given the current public sensitivity to politicization at the DOJ, it is not ideal that the aspiring head of this department could not provide a direct answer to the simple question of whether he would let potential White House conflicts of interest impact ongoing DOJ proceedings.

If justice is needed against today’s tech giants, then it appears it will come in due time regardless of the actions of a Garland DOJ. In Google v. Oracle, the Supreme Court is already examining allegations that Google stole competitors’ intellectual property to create Android—solidifying its mobile monopoly through anti-competitive means. Likewise, a majority of state attorneys general have already filed lawsuits accusing Google of engaging in monopolistic behavior, including forcing phone developers to pre-install Google’s apps as a condition for using Android. However, while state attorneys general and the Supreme Court may possess the capability of enforcing law and order, only the next attorney general can restore public faith in the Department of Justice as an institution. That process should start with Garland pledging to keep the DOJ independent of the executive branch.

During his confirmation hearing, Garland declined to commit to refrain from interfering in the Durham investigation—the probe being run by DOJ special counsel John Durham into possible illicit spying on the Trump campaign during the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Russian collusion investigation.

Former president Donald Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, indicated in his confirmation hearing that he would allow Robert Mueller, the special counsel who examined allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, to complete his investigation. He continually heaped praise on Mueller, going so far as to say he would not “be bullied into doing anything I think is wrong.” If only Garland was willing to make the same commitment with Durham at his confirmation hearing.

Should Garland interfere in the Durham investigation, then the Biden DOJ could quickly become perceived as being more politicized than that of the Obama and Trump administrations. That is not what the public wants or deserves. Lisa Monaco, Biden’s nominee for deputy attorney general, seems to understand as much. That is why, at her confirmation hearing, she committed to ensuring Durham has all the resources he needs to complete his probe. One can only hope that Garland ultimately comes to the same conclusion if he has not already.

While Garland’s lack of clear answers at his committee hearing has understandably raised some eyebrows, it is still important that everyone look at the new attorney general with some perspective. At the end of the day, he still boasts a strong track record as a centrist with bipartisan support and an impressive record of accomplishments. Time will tell if the pressure and expectations of his new job will impact his impartiality and future behavior, but the stability and credibility of the DOJ are depending on him staying the course.

Terry Campo served as counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee 

Image: Reuters

Peter Suciu

MiG-29K,

Since its introduction in the early 1980s, the Soviet Cold War-era Mikoyan MiG-29 has been widely exported and it has served in a variety of regions around the globe. Now the twin-engine combat aircraft, which was developed as an air superiority fighter in the 1970s, will be heading to the extreme conditions of the arctic for the first time.

Since its introduction in the early 1980s, the Soviet Cold War-era Mikoyan MiG-29 has been widely exported and it has served in a variety of regions around the globe. Now the twin-engine combat aircraft, which was developed as an air superiority fighter in the 1970s, will be heading to the extreme conditions of the arctic for the first time.

MiG-29K, Explained: 

The Russian military has been conducting combat training exercises of the upgrade MiG-29K (NATO reporting name: Fulcrum-D) from the Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the arctic. The goal of the operations has been to increase the zone of controlled airspace over Russia's northern sea routes, including those in the Barents Sea.

"The replacement of the flight personnel and MiG-31BM fighters of a separate composite aviation regiment took place at the Northern Fleet's Rogachyovo airfield," the press office of the Russian Navy's Northern Fleet said in a statement to Tass. "They were replaced for the first time by pilots of deck-based MiG-29K fighters of the 100th shipborne aviation regiment of the Northern Fleet's Air Force and Air Defense Army."

The press office added that the experimental combat duty will expand the area by employing the Northern Fleet's fighter aviation in the Arctic while it also increases the zone of controlled airspace over the Northern Sea Route.

The 100th shipborne aviation regiment is reportedly outfitted with generation four-plus MiG-29K fighters, the all-weather carrier-based variant of the original MiG-29. It was developed in the late 1980s from the MiG-29M, and it took its first flight in July 1988.

However, as the Russian Navy preferred the Su-27K – later re-designated Su-33 – Russia did not move forward with the MiG-29K program, and only two prototypes were originally built in the early 1990s. However, the Mikoyan Design Bureau did not stop its work on the MiG-29K aircraft despite the lack of financing since 1992.

The program later received a boost in the late 1990s to meet an Indian requirement for a ship-borne fighter following the purchase of a former Soviet aircraft carrier, which became INS Vikramaditya. The program was restarted and the MiG-29K was first received by the Indian Navy in 2009. As the Russian Navy's Su-33s began to near the end of their service, the MiG-29K was seen as a fitting replacement.

Going North

Now for the first time, MiG-29Ks are being deployed to the arctic region. The 100th shipborne aviation regiment's pilots had previously participated in the long-distance deployment of the Northern Fleet's carrier group in the Mediterranean Sea on the Russian heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov.

The aircraft will join the Northern Fleet's 45th Air Force and Air Defense Army (anti-aircraft missile)regiment, which is armed with S-400 'Triumf' surface-to-air missile systems. The unit assumed combat duty on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago several years ago.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Seth J. Frantzman

Israeli Military, Middle East

Israeli is a leader in drone technology and so knows how to counter these dangerous weapons.

Israel’s defense giant Israel Aerospace Industries and Edge, a UAE-based advanced technology group, signed a memorandum of understanding on March 11. It is the latest in growing ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates in the wake of the September 2020 peace deal. Since then IAI has also attended IDEX, the large defense exhibition in the UAE in February 2021. The new emerging partnership could see more Israeli defense companies working with partners in the Gulf.

The new memorandum foresees cooperation in developing advanced counter-drone solutions, or what is called C-UAE, countering unmanned aerial systems. Drones pose a growing threat, according to U.S. military leaders at Central Command. The Gulf is particularly vulnerable as the Iranian attack using drones and cruise missiles on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq energy facility in 2019 illustrated. Drones can be used by terrorist groups, purchased off the shelf and modified, or they can be used by more advanced powers like Iran. Hybrid militant groups, like the Houthi rebels in Yemen, use Iranian technology in their kamikaze drones. 

Given the rising threat it is no surprise companies in the region are looking to improve their capabilities. The Israeli Iron Dome system and the U.S. Patriot system can confront drone threats. Other Israeli technology has been developed that combines electro-optics, jamming and radar, as well as new laser technology. These systems like Rafael’s Drone Dome and IAI’s Drone Guard are well placed to confront drone threats. Israel, a leader in making various types of drones, knows the challenge from both ends.

The new agreement is supposed to have wide ranging benefits for the region, the companies said in a statement. “Through leveraging IAI’s proven C-UAS solutions that are applied around the world to detect, identify, classify, and intercept a broad range of threats, EDGE, a young and disruptive company that has recently launched a series of Electronic Warfare solutions at a rapid pace, is leveraging its subsidiary, SIGN4L, a leading provider of electronic warfare services and solutions for national security, to collaborate with the Israeli defense manufacturer to build the tailored C-UAS Solution,” IAI noted.

Faisal Al Bannai, CEO and Managing Director, EDGE, said that in “line with the recent Abraham Accords and the UAE’s newly established cooperation and spirit of collaboration with Israel, EDGE and IAI are joining forces to deal with this growing threat.” At IAI there is also excitement. 

“IAI is proud to join forces with EDGE, to provide the UAE and the wider region with a unique and advanced solution in what is a key area of expertise for IAI. We believe that this collaboration will help both companies through the transfer of knowledge and sharing of capabilities. This MoU serves as a stepping-stone for further business and strategic alliances between our countries, and will enhance cooperation for research and development and technological innovation,” said Boaz Levy, the President and CEO of IAI. 

“Unmanned Aircraft Systems today are a preferred solution in building agility and resilience to the emerging challenges of asymmetric warfare. As EDGE invests extensively in autonomous capabilities, our co-development of a Counter-UAS in partnership with Israel Aerospace Industries will only help strengthen our advanced technology portfolio, and partnerships in the region and internationally,” said Bannai.

The new solution will be comprised of detection and identification using radar, optics and radio frequency. Then there will be a layer of “soft kill” solutions, such as using jamming, and then “hard kill” weapons to down the drone threat using guns, missiles or even lasers. These are the usual components of counter-drone solutions today. These are all necessary because drones can maneuver and fly slowly, and it is important to be able to locate them and classify them. For instance, drones can easily shut down an airport, which was clear from the Gatwick drone incident in 2018. Finding the drone and classifying it as a threat or something else, is essential. This needs to be done quickly as well. Many counter-UAS solutions have the ability to jam the drone’s frequency or even take it over and land it safely.

IAI is one of Israel’s largest defense companies and a world leader in aerospace. It has recently completed new loitering munition sales to several countries in Asia and is partnership with South Korea’a KAI on a loitering munition solution for helicopters. Inroads for IAI in the Gulf already began last year before the peace accord when it signed an agreement with Group 42 in the Gulf. The Edge agreement is important and symbolic. Edge is headquartered in Abu Dhabi

“It is dedicated to bringing innovative technologies and services to market with greater speed and efficiency,” the statement about the MOU noted. “EDGE offers expertise across five core clusters: Platforms and Systems; Missiles & Weapons; Cyber Defense; Electronic Warfare and Intelligence; and Mission Support.” 

Seth J. Frantzman is a Jerusalem-based journalist who holds a Ph.D. from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the executive director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis and a writing fellow at Middle East Forum. He is the author of After ISIS: America, Iran and the Struggle for the Middle East (Gefen Publishing) and Drone Wars: Pioneers, Killing Machines, Artificial Intelligence, and the Battle for the Future (Forthcoming, Bombardier Books). Follow him on Twitter at @sfrantzman.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

M24,

For several decades, the U.S. Army’s standard sniper rifle was the M24, essentially a slightly modified version of the Remington 700 rifle, known for its high accuracy. In addition to tight shot groupings even at greater rangers, the M24 sniper rifle is also incredibly robust, retaining accuracy well past when it was expected to.

For several decades, the U.S. Army’s standard sniper rifle was the M24, essentially a slightly modified version of the Remington 700 rifle, known for its high accuracy. In addition to tight shot groupings even at greater rangers, the M24 sniper rifle is also incredibly robust, retaining accuracy well past when it was expected to.

One Army Major who was involved with the rifle’s testing said the following about the rifle: “Interesting side note was there was a 10,000 round requirement for the barrel to maintain the original accuracy. In fact, after some 10,000 round tests, we discovered the accuracy improved. A few barrels were tested past 20,000 and accuracy never went below the original accuracy requirement.” The Army adopted the rifle in the late 1980s, and though it remains an excellent medium-distance rifle, it has since been outclassed by more modern rifle designs.

Beginning in the early 2010s, the Army began to move away from the M24 platform in favor of the M110, a suppressed semi-automatic platform. The Army has also issued the M2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifle (a bolt-action design) in some numbers to Army sniper teams. Lessons learned from the long-distance engagements that defined some of the fighting in Afghanistan necessitated a weapon system that could hit targets farther out than the 800 meter distances the M24 was capable of.

The M2010 is chambered in the .300 Winchester Magnum cartridge. Though the cartridge’s bullet is the same diameter as the 7.62x51mm NATO, the case is 16mm longer and can hold more propellent allowing for engagements at approximately 50 percent greater ranges than what had been possible with the M24.

Like the Army, the United States Marine Corps has fielded a variant of the Remington Model 700 Rifle, the M40. Though the Army’s M24 and the Marine Corps’ M40 are chambered in the same 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge, the Army’s M24 long action allows for the rifle to fire longer rifle cartridges with the same bullet diameter like the .300 Winchester Magnum, whereas the Marine’s M40’s short action cannot fire cartridges longer than the original NATO cartridge.

In any case, after over 50 years of service, the Marines are moving away from the M40 platform in favor of Barrett Firearms’ Multi-role Adaptive Design rifle. The MRAD is a highly adaptable platform that can quickly be reconfigured for a variety of cartridges, allowing for high shooter customization. It can in essence be tailor-made to whatever mission requirements would be and offers a considerably greater range than either the M24 or M40. You can read more about the powerful rifle here.

Despite the M24’s long and storied history, the rifle will likely be seen less and less in the U.S. military, as the rifle just can’t compete with the improvements in weight, range, and accuracy afforded by alternative precision rifle platforms. Still, over thirty years in Army service was a good run, and a testament to the M24 sniper rifle’s solid design.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Military and political officials in South Sudan supporting community-based militias in the Greater Jonglei region, must be held accountable for violence that killed more than 700 people over a six-month period last year, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Monday. 

Charlie Gao

Submarines, Asia

Against Chinese submarines, Seoul's technology edge is not significant.

Here's What You Need to Know: The KSS-III is looking to be heavier and larger than the KSS-II and KSS-I.

While South Korea is not known for its submarine fleet, it possesses a decent sized, quietly capable fleet. The ultimate goal of the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN) is to produce their own diesel-electric attack submarine. The current fleet is relatively modern and possesses a strong overall capability for a diesel-electric fleet. But how does it stack up against the sub fleet of China and North Korea? Like many South Korean projects (eg. KDX-I, KDX-II, KDX-III for destroyers), the sub fleet is produced in a series of three. The KSS-I and KSS-II are German designs. The KSS-III will be the indigenous diesel-electric attack submarine. Some rumors have been floating around about a KSS-N nuclear submarine, but there is no concrete information on whether this proposal is being taken seriously. All submarines are relatively recent purchases, with the KSS-I being delivered in a series of two deals from 1993 to 2001, and the KSS-II being delivered from 2007 to the current day.

Consider the KSS-I, alternately referred to as the Chang Bogo-class, or Type 209/1200 in the German export designation is a simple diesel-electric attack submarine. The number “1200” in the German designation indicates the tonnage of the submarine. Armed with eight standard 533mm torpedo tubes, the primary weapon of the KSS-I is the German SUT torpedo, it is an export torpedo originally developed in the 1970s. The torpedo is electrically driven and wire-guided, with a max speed of 35 knots and a range of around 40km.

The ROKN operates the Mod 2 variant of the SUT, which allows the firing submarine to receive data from the seeker of the torpedo, potentially increasing accuracy and allowing it to act as a remote sensor for the submarine. The ROKN ordered two batches of 48 SUT Mod 2s along with their Type 209 submarines. The KSS-I was later modernized to utilize sub-launched Harpoon missiles as well as the indigenous Korean “White Shark” active-homing fire-and-forget torpedo. Nine KSS-1s are operated by the ROKN, with no plans to acquire more.  Further modernization of the type is being considered, including attaching additional sonar arrays and possibly converting them from diesel-electric to air-independent propulsion. The design continues to be produced for export, Korean companies acquired a license to build the submarine and are selling three of the type to Indonesia.

The KSS-II, or Son-Won-Il-class in ROKN service, or Type 214 continues the trend of the ROKN fielding German submarine designs. Unlike the KSS-I, the first ship of which was built in Germany, all KSS-IIs are built by Korean companies: Daewoo and Hyundai. The major advantage of the KSS-II is that it utilizes air-independent propulsion (AIP), allowing it to be more stealthy and stay underwater longer than earlier designs. It accomplishes this through the use of Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells. The AIP system augments the existing diesel-electric powerplant, only running when the submarine is submerged. As installed on the KSS-II, the AIP system gives an underwater endurance of two weeks. Armament is generally similar to the KSS-I, with the submarine being able to use torpedoes and anti-ship submarine-launch missiles. The type also fields the ISUS 90 command and control system that amalgamates all sensor input and command and control functions. As standard per its class, the KSS-II is fitted with bow and flank sonar modules. The final KSS-II was completed in September 2017, being the ninth boat of its class.

After the completion of the KSS-II, South Korea wanted to craft its own design. The KSS-III is looking to be heavier and larger than the KSS-II and KSS-I.

It’s estimated that the KSS-III will weigh around 3000 tons, more than twice as heavy as the KSS-I. A lot of the weight probably comes from the expanded armament of the KSS-III: it’s designed with a vertical launch system that can fire the Korean Hyunmoon ballistic missile or a myriad of other missiles, possibly including the American Tomahawk. This would give the ROKN a significant sub strike capability, posing a threat against China or other larger navies they may be facing. Nine KSS-IIIs are planned to be procured in three batches of three, with increasing levels of indigenous technology in each batch. Notably, the number of VLS cells is expected to increase from six to ten in later batches of the KSS-III. No KSS-IIIs are complete, however, the keel for the first KSS-III was laid in 2016. Other KSS-IIIs are being produced at the same time, with steel being cut for the third KSS-III in July 2017.

The KSS-II and KSS-III designs compare favorably to any submarine the Korean People’s Navy can field. They possess advanced AIP propulsion designs allowing them to run quieter and longer and can fire more modern torpedos. They also have a superior sensor fit, having flank sonars, which have not been reported as being equipped on any North Korean submarines. Against Chinese submarines, the technology edge is not as significant. In general, the armament fit of the KSS-series appears to be superior, with the SUT Mod 2 having a longer range and targeting flexibility compared to the Yu-4 and Yu-6 which arm China’s Type 039 attack submarines. However, the latest Chinese submarines, the Type 039A class, appear to incorporate advanced sonar signature reduction techniques which may impede the ability for the Korean submarines to detect them.

Charlie Gao studied Political and Computer Science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national security issues.

This article first appeared in June 2018.

Image: 

Caleb Larson

B-52 Bomber,

The United States’ venerable B-52 bomber fleet could be getting a new hypersonic missile currently in development by the Air Force — the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile — to allow them to stay relevant in a future fight.

The United States’ venerable B-52 bomber fleet could be getting a new hypersonic missile currently in development by the Air Force — the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile — to allow them to stay relevant in a future fight.

In comments given to the Air Force Association’s winter meeting, Global Strike Command Head Gen. Timothy Ray said that “Certainly, we’re in the in the conversation for the HACM as that gets developed,” Breaking Defense reported. “I’m not in a place where I can give you the dates and times. But as the Air Force looks at … how we continue to go down that path, I believe the HACM will give us an additional set of capabilities that will be both fitted for bombers and for fighter aircraft. So I think it’s a pretty special capability to keep our eye on.”

The Air Force previously reported on the HACM, explaining that it would ultimately be a hypersonic air-breathing cruise missile. In contrast to other hypersonic boost-glide missiles which rely on solid-fuel rockets to reach sub-orbital space, the HACM’s advanced scramjet air-breathing engine technology would make it dependent on atmospheric oxygen for combustion and therefore propulsion, give it a shorter, lower altitude flight profile.

In tandem with the HACM, the Air Force also has a more conventional rocket-powered hypersonic vehicle, the Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon, or ARRW. The Air Force intends the ARRW to be launched from the B-52 as well as the B-1B Lancer bombers, both of which will carry the missile externally on hardpoints. Will Roper, the former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force also suggested that the new missile could be carried by Air Force F-15s as well.

In addition to the new weaponry, the B-52 will also be getting new engines. Though the Air Force has not yet selected a firm to replace their aged B-52 engines, the hope is that newer, more efficient engines will reduce fuel consumption and improve performance, allowing the B-52 to fly well into the 2050s — fully a century after its first flight.

Despite the efforts to keep the B-52 in the sky for several more decades, the Air Force’s newest bomber is also well underway. The highly stealthy B-21 Raider bomber’s maiden flight should be sometime later this year or early next year, somewhat delayed due to the ongoing pandemic.

The Air Force is currently phasing out their B-1B Lancer bombers, and regardless of when exactly the B-21 is ready for service, the Air Force will ultimately maintain a mixed fleet of brand-new, highly stealthy bombers, and enormous Cold War-era hypersonic-toting bombers. Irregardless of the B-52’s age — it won’t go away anytime soon.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Ethen Kim Lieser

Gas Prices,

In recent weeks, oil prices have surged to more than $65 a barrel. And gas prices in step already have risen about 35 cents a gallon on average over the past month, according to the AAA motor club—and could reach the much-feared $4 a gallon territory in some states by this summer.

The rise in gasoline prices across the United States has been ramping up in recent weeks, but it appears that industry executives are still reluctant to pump more oil out of the ground.

This is indeed bad news for travelers who want to hit the road on the cheap this spring and summer.

In recent weeks, oil prices have surged to more than $65 a barrel. And gas prices in step already have risen about 35 cents a gallon on average over the past month, according to the AAA motor club—and could reach the much-feared $4 a gallon territory in some states by this summer.

These quickly swelling prices, however, have been anticipated for weeks.

Last month, when the artic freeze was pummeling much of the United States, the fuel price tracking website GasBuddy projected that the national average for gas prices could surge as much as 10 to 20 cents per gallon from the average price of $2.54 per gallon.

It contended that such an increase in prices at the pump could lead the national average to rise to $2.65 to $2.75 per gallon—the highest prices seen since 2019 and the highest seasonal prices in more than five years. More than forty states are already seeing gas prices higher than last year, with half seeing double-digit increases.

“The quicker the affected refineries are able to come back online, the better, and perhaps less painful for motorists than if they remain out of service for even longer,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said in a statement, adding that the national average could surge to $3 per gallon closer to Memorial Day weekend as refineries eventually begin to switch over to EPA-mandated cleaner summer fuels.

“Oil prices have continued to rally as global oil demand recovers from the worst of the COVID-19 pandemic, and now the extreme cold weather shutting refineries down, us motorists just can’t seem to catch a break. We probably won’t see much, if any relief, anytime soon.”

Some areas will witness a more negative impact. “Expect gas prices to rise more closer to the markets these refineries serve, primarily Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas, and potentially even up the coast, as the Colonial pipeline carries refined products from the affected refineries as far as New Jersey,” De Haan added.

The prediction was indeed correct. Since Monday, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline has climbed by five cents to $2.82. Rising crude prices, tightening gas supplies, and increased gas demand continue to drive pump prices to higher ground.

According to the latest compiled data from the Energy Information Administration, total domestic gas stocks decreased by 11.9 million bbl to 231.6 million bbl, as demand increased from 8.15 million b/d to 8.73 million b/d last week.

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn.

The pain and deprivation of individual Syrians and the widespread destruction, a decade of conflict has wrought on Syria, has been documented in a series of images taken by 16 photographers working in the country.

Mark Episkopos

North Korea, Asia

Too big and will fail for sure: The DPRK’s army consists of 1.2-1.3 million active personnel with around 6 million more reservists.

Here's What You Need to Know: This is one really old and bloated military force.

North Korea’s defense budget occupies a staggering 23% of its GDP, by far the highest proportion of any 21st-century country. The DPRK’s massive military outlays have gone, in no small part, towards sustaining the fourth-largest standing army in the world. There is little question that North Korea’s prodigious ground forces are, and will be, the backbone of its capacity to wage conventional war on the Korean Peninsula. In the years following the Korean War, the North’s Korea People’s Army (KPA) was markedly smaller, but better-equipped and exponentially more modernized than its southern counterpart. These roles have all but flipped in the decades of North Korean military stagnation and economic neglect that accompanied the collapse of its Soviet benefactor.

A closer look at North Korea’s current ground forces paints the picture of a bloated army, crippled by technical backwardness and severe logistical deficits.

Despite the regime’s insulated nature, the combined efforts of South Korean and U.S. intelligence have generated reliable and fairly consistent data concerning the KPA’s makeup. The DPRK’s army consists of 1.2-1.3 million active personnel with around 6 million more reservists, 6,000 tanks, up to 15,000 artillery pieces, 6,500 - 10,000 armored vehicles, just under 300 military helicopters, and 2,100 rocket launchers.

At first glance, these numbers would seem to put the KPA in the running for one of the world’s strongest armies; in most categories, the DPRK boasts roughly twice the units of South Korea’s armed forces. But the KPA’s sheer numbers belie an altogether different reality: the bulk of KPA equipment is grossly outdated, with a great swathe being borderline inoperable.

For instance, the KPA’s tank force is largely made up of Soviet T-54/55, T-62, and domestic T-62 variants that are more befitting of a military museum than a contemporary battlefield. It remains unclear how many of these antique models, some of which are over seven decades old, are in active service. Even assuming that many or even most of them are in an operable state, the KPA’s tanks are of dubious battlefield value when compared with the much newer and significantly more powerful K-1 and K-2 series tanks fielded by the ROK’s armed forces.

The same dynamic is evident in the KPA’s artillery roster. North Korea’s M-30 and D-20 are mid-20th century Soviet howitzers being held back by their low range and cripplingly poor accuracy. The 170-millimeter Koksan, the KPA’s largest artillery piece, suffers from an abnormally high dud rate and is unlikely to inflict meaningful damage on critical South Korean infrastructure or military equipment before being neutralized by ROK counter-battery fires.

Elsewhere, as with armored combat vehicles and attack helicopters, the ROK occupies both qualitative and quantitative superiority. The KPA’s deficit in the latter is surprisingly stark, with the ROK army boasting downwards of 700 helicopters in active military service.

Not even the KPA’s numerical personnel superiority is without significant caveats. There are credible, well-sourced reports that large swathes of the KPA are plagued by basic equipment shortages, crippling malnourishment and, more recently, a lethal Covid-19 outbreak.

The KPA’s decrepit state follows a similarly grim pattern to that of North Korea’s moribund air force and obsolete parts of its navy. By widespread expert consensus, the DPRK stands to lose decisively in a contemporary conventional war with the ROK.

Pyongyang’s massive conventional defense outlays continue to yield negligible military value. They have succeeded only in propping up a bloated and increasingly unviable military-industrial complex that cannot be meaningfully reformed without a comprehensive decommission and modernization effort.

Mark Episkopos is a frequent contributor to The National Interest and serves as a research assistant at the Center for the National Interest. Mark is also a PhD student in History at American University.

This article first appeared in September 2020.

Image: Reuters

Stephen Silver

Israel Military,

A leading major general in the Israeli Defense Forces said this week that in Israel’s wars in the future, the nation will likely come under fire from rockets and missiles-as many as 2,000 a day.

A leading major general in the Israeli Defense Forces said this week that in Israel’s wars in the future, the nation will likely come under fire from rockets and missiles-as many as 2,000 a day.

The comments came from  OC Home Front Command Maj.-Gen. Uri Gordin at the B’Sheva Conference in Jerusalem, and were reported by The Jerusalem Post.

“[Our] enemies on the different fronts need to know that if needed, we will activate a powerful military that has never been seen before,” Gordin said, per the newspaper.

“They know they cannot defeat us on the battlefield so they try to move the war to a second front and that is our homes and in our cities.”

In the first decades following its independence in 1948, Israel mostly fought conventional air and ground wars against its enemies, including in the 1948 War of Independence, and 1967 Six-Day War, and the 1973 Yom Kippur War.

More recently, however, Israel has often suffered periods of sustained rocket attacks, most often from Hezbollah (located in Lebanon) and Hamas (in Gaza.) This has led specifically to Israeli military action in Gaza in 2008-2009, 2012 and 2014.

Since 2011, Israel has had in place a missile defense system called the Iron Dome. Developed with the assistance of the United States, starting in 2004, the Iron Dome system has been incredibly successful, at least according to the Israeli military. It’s been claimed that the Iron Dome has stopped 95 percent of incoming rockets. 

The National Interest recently explained how the Iron Dome system works:

“The detection technology is the first tier of three. A radar detects the presence of a missile over or near a given area. Then that information is relayed to a control center computer where the missile trajectory is calculated. If the system determines the missile will not hit a populated area, the missile is allowed to land, but if the missile is a threat countermeasures are put into action.”

While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former President Barack Obama were often at odds during the years they were both in office, Netanyahu did thank Obama, during his address to Congress in 2015, for support of missile defense, including “his support for more missile interceptors during our operation last summer when we took on Hamas terrorists.”

Israel has claimed that the Iron Dome has stopped a total of 2,500 missiles since it became operational a decade ago. Gordin said in his speech that Israel will be hit with 2,000 rockets and missiles a day in the event of a war. According to the Post, Israel believes Hezbollah has about 150,000 rockets and missiles in its arsenal.

 Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.

Seth J. Frantzman

Israeli Navy, Middle East

Israel is speeding ahead with country-wide vaccinations and its military forces are ready for action.

Israel’s navy embarked on several unique missions in mid-March. First, along with the rest of the Israel Defense Forces, the navy has become one of the world’s first vaccinated navies. It also embarked on its annual Noble Dina exercise with the Greek navy, which saw the French and Cypriot navies participate for the first time.

The naval drill had to be cancelled last year due to the coronavirus pandemic. Now Israel hopes to be back on the high seas more often with partner countries. This is important because Israel is outfitting its new Sa’ar 6 corvette ship which will defend its exclusive economic zone off the coast from threats. In recent years there has been an uptick in tensions in the eastern Mediterranean. Israel is partnering more often with Greece and Cyprus, on energy deals for instance. In addition, Greece and Cyprus are working more closely with Egypt. Together all these countries are working with France. The elephant in the room is often Turkey, which has cold relations with Israel, Greece, Cyprus, France and Egypt. Israel doesn’t seek to provoke Turkey, but it is clear that these drills are bringing together a series of countries that share interests in the eastern Mediterranean. It appears that in future years the United Arab Emirates or Egypt could participate as Israel partners more closely with Arab states.

The Head of Exercises of the Israeli navy Lieutenant Commander Amichai Rahamim said that Noble Dina is an important drill that has taken place for many years with Greece. The inclusion of France and Cyprus for the first time with naval and air assets was important. The drill took place west of Cyprus. It included surface vessels, a missile boat, submarines, helicopters and planes. “It is focused not only on a surface exercise, also mule-threat exercise of air and underwater and surface threats,” said the commander. “The main task is to combine and cooperate multi-nationally against the threats and practice our forces and ships in answering these threats and building the cooperation against these threats.” 

Enhancing interoperability is important for Israel. Israel’s navy was traditionally a smaller service in Israel and Israel has never been a major naval power. However, in recent years it has sought to acquire more submarines and the Sa’ar 6 ships. These will be packed with Israel’s latest technology. Defending the economic zone is important for Israel, as is working with the French and the United States, more powerful navies that have forces in the region.

“[O]nce we conduct this exercise, we learn a lot and together we are stronger. Our friends over here in the Eastern Mediterranean, the Cyprus and Hellenic navies that are close to us and neighbors at sea. It is important to practice with them as well as with the French and U.S. navy which act in the Mediterranean,” says Rahamim.

Naval tensions have grown in recent weeks between Israel and Iran. On February 26, the Israeli-owned Helios Ray was attacked in the Gulf of Oman and Israel has blamed Iran. Reports on March 11 in The Wall Street Journal also say that Israel has attacked up to a dozen Iranian cargo ships destined for Syria. Israel also blamed Iran for an oil spill off the coast in February. The context therefore is that there are rising tensions and naval units are important for Israel and its security.

Six ships took part in the drill. Israel sent the INS Romach, a missile boat, and a submarine. Israel’s head of Naval Operations, Rear Admiral Eyal Harel said that “over the past week, the Navy led a large-scale exercise in which it implemented capabilities in underwater warfare, search and rescue, convoy escort and surface combat. These exercises are of paramount importance in strengthening the Navy’s connection with foreign fleets who share common interests.” The ships practiced at sea between March 7 and 11.

Seth J. Frantzman is a Jerusalem-based journalist who holds a Ph.D. from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the executive director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis and a writing fellow at Middle East Forum. He is the author of After ISIS: America, Iran and the Struggle for the Middle East (Gefen Publishing) and Drone Wars: Pioneers, Killing Machines, Artificial Intelligence, and the Battle for the Future (Forthcoming, Bombardier Books). Follow him on Twitter at @sfrantzman.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

KF-X,

Despite South Korea’s reputation as a technological powerhouse within Asia, the country has not fielded any stealth fighters — until now.

Despite South Korea’s reputation as a technological powerhouse within Asia, the country has not fielded any stealth fighters — until now. South Korea’s own and only aerospace manufacturer, KAI, is currently working on prototyping the KF-X airplane, or Korea Fighter eXperimental, a jet that though not as stealthy as some advanced 5th generation fighters like the F-35 and F-22, would nonetheless be much stealthier than any of it 4th generation predecessors.

KF-X: Explained 

The KF-X will ultimately replace both the F-4 and F-5 fighter jets, both aged American designs that would not be likely to survive against more modern fighter airplanes or anti-aircraft weaponry. And, like the assistance provided by the United States in securing both of these Cold War-era jets, KAI has reported received some technical assistance from Lockheed Martin for their stealth project.

The KF-X project has been underway since 2015 and is projected to cost 8.8 trillion won or about 7.9 billion USD. In order to offset costs, project costs are split 80-20 between Seoul and Jakarta, with South Korea being the larger partner. And despite the KF-X project’s relative newness, the first prototype stealth fighter could take its maiden flight as soon as 2022.

South Korea’s Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Lee Seong-yong recently visited the KAI plant where the indigenous stealth fighter is being assembled to check on the fighter’s progress Yonhap News Agency reported, where he asked the firm to “work on the project with a sense of duty.”

F-35, Lite? 

The KF-X resembles the American F-35 stealth fighter to a certain degree: both fighters have a prominent nose chine, contoured to scatter enemy radar and preserve the fighter’s stealth profile. Though the two jets share some characteristics, the F-35 would likely be much stealthier than its South Korean counterpart.

Still, the stealth characteristics that the KF-X would likely feature — like radar-deflecting serpentine air intakes and a radar-absorbent coating — would afford the new fighter a reduced radar signature when compared to the F-15s and F-16s that South Korea currently flies.

Though the KF-X does indeed have several radar-mitigating characteristics going for it, one of the big hindrances the platform faces to maintaining its stealth is externally carried weapons. As it lacks an enclosed bomb bay, any ordinance carried on the airframe are potential radar reflection points.

The Future

Ultimately Seoul would like to acquire a total of 120 of the stealthy fighters, which should be delivered in their entirety by 2032, at which point South Korea would become just the second Asian country behind China to field an indigenously-built stealth fighter. One thing that both the Chinese and South Korean new fighter projects have in common? Both programs owe some of their success to the United States’ own research into stealth, albeit in very different ways.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Image: YouTube Screenshot. 

Caleb Larson

P-8 Poseidon,

A recent announcement from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency — responsible for equipping, training, and advising American overseas allies — cleared the way for the German government to acquire five P-8A Poseidon aircraft as well as associated P-8A support and training equipment. The deal, which you can read here, is worth $1.77 billion.

A recent announcement from the Defense Security Cooperation Agency — responsible for equipping, training, and advising American overseas allies — cleared the way for the German government to acquire five P-8A Poseidon aircraft as well as associated P-8A support and training equipment. The deal is worth $1.77 billion.

The DSCA elaborated on the certification, saying “The proposed sale will improve Germany’s capability to meet current and future threats by providing critical capabilities to coalition maritime operations. Germany currently operates the Lockheed P-3C Orion, but that aircraft is reaching end-of-life and will retire in 2024. Germany plans to replace it with the P-8A Poseidon.

The proposed sale will allow Germany to modernize and sustain its Maritime Surveillance Aircraft (MSA) capability for the next 30 years. Germany will have no difficulty transitioning its MSA force to P-8 and absorbing these aircraft into its armed forces. The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the basic military balance in the region.”

The P-8 is a powerful multi-mission maritime patrol airplane that can conduct surveillance and reconnaissance missions, as well as search and rescue and anti-submarine warfare. The Boeing airframe is similar to the 737NG and share 86% commonality with the commercial airliner airframe, making it financially more economical to operate. Compared to its commercial counterpart, the P-8's airframe is strengthened for better low-altitude handling, and has two turbofan engines, whereas the older Orion has four turboprops.

Germany currently operates 8 P-3C Orions for maritime patrol and surveillance. The airframe design entered American service in the 1960s and has since grown long in the tooth. Berlin had previously examined overhauling and upgrading their Orions, though deemed the effort too costly and technically challenging to be feasible.

This recent acquisition comes on the heels of a freedom of navigation announcement by the German government, which plans to sail a German Navy frigate through the South China Sea later this summer. The area through which the German frigate would sail is claimed in large part by China but not recognized by the international community.

The German Navy has not sailed through the area since 2002, and the planned voyage has been hailed as a strong assertion of Germany’s commitment to international law. Significantly undercutting Berlin’s message, however, is the fact that ship will not pass within 12 nautical miles of islands claimed by China, in essence acknowledging Beijing’s claims to contested islands.

So despite Berlin upgrading their maritime patrol capability and planning an important freedom of navigation gesture, is Germany truly flexing its maritime muscles, or tacitly acknowledging Beijing’s claims in the South China Sea?

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer with The National Interest. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Caleb Larson

B-21 Raider,

Although many details of the Air Force’s secretive B-21 Raider stealth bomber program remain unknown, a recent Air Force press release provides some clues as to the stealth bomber’s dimensions, an important piece of information that can help to deduce some of the bomber’s characteristics.

Although many details of the Air Force’s secretive B-21 Raider stealth bomber program remain unknown, a recent Air Force press release provides some clues as to the stealth bomber’s dimensions, an important piece of information that can help to deduce some of the bomber’s characteristics.

In the press release, the Air Force showcased a prototype Environmental Protection Shelter, essentially a large canopy used to cover aircraft while performing maintenance outdoors. 

“Environmental Protection Shelters help extend the life of the aircraft and reduce required maintenance by limiting UV exposure, limiting snow accumulation and melt, and limiting icing/de-icing operations experienced by the aircraft over time,” an Air Force official explained. “These shelters also help us generate sorties more quickly by eliminating the need to always have to move aircraft in and out of hangars.”

In the photograph, a pickup truck is parked next to the shelter. Comparing the truck’s approximate 20-foot length to concrete grids on the ground, the shelter is roughly 150 feet long and 80 feet deep. As the shelter is expected to fully cover the B-21, the bomber’s length would not exceed 150 feet.

Ultimately, three Main Operating Bases will service the B-21 Raider: Ellsworth Air Force Base, South Dakota, Whiteman Air Force Base, Missouri, and Dyess Air Force Base, Texas. More temporary Environmental Protection Shelters would airmen to perform maintenance at more remote, forward operating locations. “Major maintenance activities will still be performed indoors in hangars, but the B-21 Raider design will also provide us the flexibility to perform routine maintenance right on the flightline,” an Air Force official explained.

If these dimensions are correct, than the B-21 will be somewhat smaller compared to the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber. The B-2 is 172 feet long and about 70 from nose to rear wingtips, which extend past the bomber’s rear tail point.

Like the B-21, the B-2 also uses temporary shelters at remote locations that help protect the bomber’s temperature-sensitive outer radar-absorbent coatings from the elements, though the B-21’s more open, uncovered shelter design suggests the new bomber’s stealth coating is more robust and less maintenance-intense that the B-2's. Though outwardly similar to the B-2, the new stealth bomber is said to have significantly reduced radar cross-section, afforded by a stealth coating two generations more advanced than its predecessor.

Interestingly, the Air Force also specified that in addition to the Environmental Protection Shelter prototype, they are also designing a General Maintenance Hangar and a Low Observable Maintenance Hangar specifically to maintain and repair stealth coating that is bonded to the airframe's metallic skin.

Though the stealth bomber’s general shape will likely be similar to that of the B-2, the two bombers would be substantially different. Some aviation experts have suggested that the B-21’s diamond-shaped rear fuselage section could be optimized for stealth at higher altitudes, whereas the B-2 has been touted as an all-altitude stealth bomber.

It is somewhat unclear when exactly the B-21 would enter into service with the Air Force, as previous flight tests have been delayed in part due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic. Once they do, however, they’ll be the stealthiest bomber in the sky.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Fergus Ryan

TikTok,

So how do policymakers deal with a Chinese-owned social media app that isn’t really a social media app but a modern-day interactive TV station, whose editorial decisions are made by an opaque algorithm developed and maintained in Beijing?

There’s one thing we’re all getting wrong about TikTok: it’s not really a social media app. As TikTok Australia’s general manager told the Senate Select Committee on Foreign Interference through Social Media in September last year, the app is ‘less about social connection and more about broadcasting creativity and expression’.

Put another way, think of TikTok more as the modern incarnation of a media publisher—like a newspaper or a TV network—than as a social forum like Facebook or Twitter. That’s because TikTok is much more assertively curatorial than its competitors. It’s not a forum, it’s an editor. Its algorithm decides what each user sees, and it’s the opacity of that algorithm that presents the most worrying national security risk.

It may sound like an insignificant distinction, but TikTok’s emphasis on an ‘interest graph’ instead of a ‘social graph’ took the app’s competitors completely by surprise, and has largely gone over the heads of most lawmakers. The app, owned by Chinese technology company ByteDance, hit 2.3 billion all-time downloads in August 2020, so it’s high time policymakers understood exactly what makes TikTok tick.

An essay by Eugene Wei should be at the top of their reading list. A San Francisco–based start-up investor and former Amazon and Facebook employee, Wei dissects TikTok’s strategy and shows how its recommendation engine keeps users glued to their screens. It does it not by connecting them with friends or family, but by closely analysing their behaviour on the app and serving them more of what they’re interested in.

Wei’s opus, which approaches 20,000 words and is only the first in a three-part series, explains how TikTok is not the same as the major social media platforms we’re more familiar with. Put simply, on Facebook and Twitter, the content that users see is largely decided by who they follow. On TikTok, however, the user doesn’t have to follow anyone. Instead, the algorithm very quickly learns from how users interact with the content they’re served in the app’s ‘For You’ feed to decide what it should deliver to them next.

The approach is similar to that of Spotify and Netflix, whose recommendation algorithms take note of which songs and movies you listen to or watch in full and which you skip to decide what new content to suggest. As Wei puts it, ‘TikTok’s algorithm is so effective that it doesn’t feel like work for viewers. Just by watching stuff and reacting, the app learns your tastes quickly. It feels like passive personalization.’

It’s a strategy, Wei argues, that allowed a team of Chinese engineers—who didn’t necessarily have a good understanding of the cultures in the places where the app is available—to take the world by storm.

TikTok didn’t just break out in America. It became unbelievably popular in India and in the Middle East, more countries whose cultures and language were foreign to the Chinese Bytedance product teams. Imagine an algorithm so clever it enables its builders to treat another market and culture as a complete black box. What do people in that country like? No, even better, what does each individual person in each of those foreign countries like? You don’t have to figure it out. The algorithm will handle that. The algorithm knows.

But that’s not the only thing the algorithm knows. In a recent Protocol China exposé, a former censor at ByteDance said the company’s ‘powerful algorithms not only can make precise predictions and recommend content to users—one of the things it’s best known for in the rest of the world—but can also assist content moderators with swift censorship’.

The former employee, who described working at ByteDance as like being ‘a tiny cog in a vast, evil machine’, said that even live-streamed shows on the company’s apps are ‘automatically transcribed into text, allowing algorithms to compare the notes with a long and constantly-updated list of sensitive words, dates and names, as well as Natural Language Processing models. Algorithms would then analyze whether the content was risky enough to require individual monitoring.’

There’s no doubt that TikTok and its parent company have these abilities to monitor and censor. The question is, will they continue to use it? Certainly, the blunt censorship that typified TikTok’s earlier approach to content moderation and is par for the course on ByteDance’s domestic apps is unlikely to continue, especially after the public scrutiny over TikTok’s censoring of content related to the Tiananmen Square massacre, Black Lives Matter protests and Beijing’s persecution of Uyghurs and other ethnic minorities.

But there’s ample room for ByteDance to covertly tweak users’ feeds, subtly nudging them towards content favoured by governments and ruling parties—including the Chinese Communist Party. After all, it’s an approach that would be in line with the strategy that China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and state media are already deploying.

Beijing is exploiting pre-existing grievance narratives and amplifying pro-CCP Western influencers in the knowledge that Western voices are more likely to penetrate target online networks than official CCP spokespeople. The strategy, referred to as ‘Borrowing mouths to speak’ (借嘴说话), is reminiscent of the Kremlin’s approach and is perfectly suited to being covertly deployed on Chinese-owned and -operated social media apps.

Just as experiments have shown that TikTok’s algorithm can hurtle users from a politically neutral feed into a far-right firehose of content, so too can it easily be used to send users down any extreme rabbit hole. By design, the app groups people into ‘clusters’ (otherwise known as filter bubbles) based on their preferences. TikTok’s executives stress that they have measures in place to ensure people don’t become trapped in those filter bubbles. TikTok’s recommendation system ‘works to intersperse diverse types of content along with those you already know you love’, the company claims. The goal, they say, is to ensure that users are exposed to ‘new perspectives and ideas’, but who decides which new perspectives and ideas?

What’s to stop Beijing from pressuring TikTok to encourage communities of Xinjiang denialists to flourish on the platform, for instance? As our report revealed, there’s already evidence that this is happening. Our analysis of the hashtag #Xinjiang showed a depiction of the region that glosses over the human-rights tragedy unfolding there and instead provides a more politically convenient version for the CCP, replete with smiling and dancing Uyghurs.

The power of social media apps has been underestimated before. When Facebook started as a ‘hot or not’ website in a Harvard dorm room at the turn of the millennium, who would have expected it would go on to play a role in inciting violence 13,000 kilometres away?

So how do policymakers deal with a Chinese-owned social media app that isn’t really a social media app but a modern-day interactive TV station, whose editorial decisions are made by an opaque algorithm developed and maintained in Beijing?

It’s past time governments realised the unique problem TikTok presents and they must now tailor solutions to deal with it properly.