European Union

This is Monday’s edition of our new Brussels Briefing. To receive it every morning in your email in-box, sign up here.

  © AFP photo

It was one of the most intriguing invitations of the year: would Greek premier Alexis Tsipras agree to meet The Visegrad Wall?

The Visegrad group — Hungary, Slovakia, Poland and the Czech Republic — are leading the fightback against Germany’s open-door migration policy. Mr Tsipras’ attendance was intended to show he was “in the loop” on their push to seal the Macedonia border (and trap migrants in Greece in just the way Mr Tsipras is desperate to avoid).

First Mr Tsipras declined, then he said yes, then he backed out. At the very least, it’s a great loss to political spectacle.

Even without Greece there, the V4 meeting will tee-up another stormy week of migration politics in Europe.

Andromeda-D : the automatic control system
Ignatov also spoke at length about a new VDV automated C2 system called Andromeda-D, developed by the Scientific-Research Institute of Communications and Command and Control Systems (NIISSU or НИИССУ). He describes Andromeda-D as a division-to-soldier system, with stationary points for commanders down to battalion, and vehicle-mounted systems for tactical units. Andromeda-D has passed troop testing, has been deployed in the 76th DShD, and is in the GOZ to buy it for the 7th DShD, 98th VDD, and 31st DShBr, according to Ignatov. He told Krasnaya zvezda the existing Polet-K system will be integrated into the new Andromeda-D system. He also says the VDV plans to deploy GLONASS receivers in its vehicles as part of its C2 system.

In addition, following other trials and drills, including the Center-2015 command post event, the Andromeda-D ACS was evaluated by the military in the highest of terms. It was reported that the United Instrument Manufacturing Corporation /UIMC, incorporated by the Rostec Corporation/ started, in 2015, lot supplies of the Andromeda-D ACS to the Russian Airborne Troops. Russia proposes creating an integrated system for controlling the Collective Security Treaty Organization /CSTO/ member states’ rapid response forces.
The Andromeda-D ACS is a complex of automatic devices for equipping stationary and mobile troop command posts. Depending on the task, it can be mounted on a chassis of a biaxial Kamaz truck, BTR-D armored personnel carrier and BMD-2 or BMD-4 amphibious infantry fighting vehicle. Andromeda-D is developed specifically for airborne troops and is adapted to loading onto a plane, flying and landing. Andromeda-D offers a complete array of multimedia services like facsimile communications, video conferencing, data transmission and special purpose telephone communication.

Russia’s Airborne Assault Forces (AAF) will start taking delivery of new Andromeda-D automated command and control systems (CCS) next year, the Defense Ministry said on Monday. MOSCOW, December 24 (RIA Novosti) - Russia’s Airborne Assault Forces (AAF) will start taking delivery of new Andromeda-D automated command and control systems (CCS) next year, the Defense Ministry said on Monday. The first Andromeda-D systems will be deployed in four AAF divisions across Russia: in Novorossiisk, Ivanovo, Tula and Ulyanovsk, ministry spokesman Col Alexander Kucherenko said. The system, which uses digital telecommunication equipment, can be deployed at fixed-site or mobile command and control stations and is geared to AAF specifics as a highly mobile military service.

Uran-9
The Uran-9 is a tracked unmanned combat ground vehicle (UCGV) being developed and produced by Rostec for the international market. According to a release by Rosoboronexport, the system will be designed to deliver combined combat, reconnaissance and counter-terrorism units with remote reconnaissance and fire support. The armament is 2A72 mod ABM M30-M3 from Impul's 2 (Sevastopol') along Russian artillery and other producers , four ATGM like Ataka or other , also Igla or Strela SAM , FCS , cam IR sensors NV laser and other for detection .

Platform-M

Argo Mobility Platform

Argo Mobility Platform combat robot
Russian, Syrian, Iranian and Hizballah troops were taking up positions Monday, Jan. 18, for a massive offensive to retake Aleppo, Syria’s second city. The rebel militias occupying different parts of the city have repulsed all previous assaults.
A victory in Aleppo (prewar population: 1 million) is expected in Moscow, Tehran and Damascus to reverse the tide of the war and force the Syrian rebels to accept that their insurgency is at an end and their only remaining option is to join the peace process initiated by Russia on Syria’s future.
Russian military intervention since late August has lifted the Syrian army out of its hopeless state and imbued its officers with fresh vigor and the troops with high morale. Bashad Assad’s army is not the same largely defeated one of five months ago. Russian air strikes have restored its commander’s confidence in their ability to win. Cutting-edge weapons are reaching combat units with Russian military advisers on hand to teach the Syrian army how to use them, along with exposure to advanced methods of warfare that have been developed by a world-class military.
DEBKAfile’s military sources add that the operational standards of Hizballah and the pro-Iranian Shiite militias fighting alongside the Syrian army have likewise been enhanced by their exposure to Russian tactics.
Those tactics have produced a substantial drop in Hizballah, Iranian and Syrian casualties in battle, contrary to reports of high casualties claimed in the Western mainstream press,
Robots, novel replacements for boots on the ground, recently made their debut appearance in the Syrian arena, our military sources have revealed. They are cast in a star role in the offensive for the recovery of Aleppo.
Heralding a revolution in modern warfare, the Russians are fielding two kinds of robots – the Platform-M combat robot and the Argo Mobility Platform, both heavily armored and capable of functioning day or night in a variety of battlefield conditions. Platform-M gathers intelligence, uncovers fixed and moving targets and destroys them. It also provides firepower support for forces on the move and secures military installations or routes traveled by the army. Platform-M is armed with semiautomatic or automatic control firing systems.for destroying enemy targets But extra fire power can be mounted on the system as required.
The Argo is designed for rough-country operations, especially on mountainous or rocky terrain. In recent battles, Syrian rebels were startled to find themselves under sudden heavy fire from the unmanned Russian robots.
Russian General Staff Chief Valery Gerasimov recently spoke of a plan to “completely automate the battle in Syria.” He added, “Perhaps soon we will witness robotic groups independently conducting warfare.” Our military sources comment that this vision is overly futuristic. No totally robotic battlefield exists anywhere in the world today outside sci-fi cinema.

For the first time in the history of the war, Russian troops conducted an attack on solid defense area of the terrorist gunmen with military robots. In the Latakia, Syrian troops under the cover of Russian robots and task success captured the strategic peak 754.5. Not long ago, the Chief of the Russian General Gerasimov, Russia claims are chemical robots war effort in the near future, the world will be witnessing, military units are robots, independently conduct the battle-and the prospect that happened a couple of days.
In 2013, Russian airborne forces were put on the payroll systems of automation of operations, Executive “Andromeda-D” on the platform C4I2 (command, control, communications, computer, intelligence, and information), with this software, the system can directly command, combat units operating branches form a complex with the involvement of modern weapons. Use the new high-tech equipment allows the levels command, combat operating can continually run the unit, perform the operations training exercise, ready to fight and fight on the battlefield is not familiar.

Private landing force command line can not perform operation on more than 5000 km of distance C4I2 to area, relaying the information not just through photos and satellite images, which also received both the entire battlefield surveillance videos, the real time combat. C4I2 combination “Andromeda-D” can be mounted on the command Bridge and two terrain as “KamAZ”, armored vehicle BTR-D, BMD-2 and BMD-4. In addition, with the particularity of the airborne forces, “Andromeda-D” can be transported by plane, flying and parachute landing. The command system, operating this warfare was brought to perform support tasks in the Syrian army mission is particularly important. Sources from the social networking site MaxPark said: during the battle of Latakia, the Russian Defence Ministry was dispatched to Syria a C4I2 “Andromeda-D”, 6 the complex military robot “Platform-M” and four “Argo” robot assemblage. Cover the robot attack combinations 152 mm self-propelled howitzer “Akatsiya”, the new field was taken to Syria not long ago, the Akatsiya is responsible AFTER the fire cover for the robot as required.

The battle to win the high score in Latakia started by diversion of the military robots, straight into the battlefield of the terrorist gunmen. On distance 100-120 m, the robot that dropped ammunition, attracted fire from the terrorist gunmen, the fire points identified are suppressed by enemy fire immediately after 152 mm self-propelled gun’s “Akatsiya”.
Followed by the robots fighting, on a distance of 150-200 m is the Syrian infantry force, whose mission is to cover robot, wipe out enemies on the peak. Though the high mountain terrain is really complicated, but the militants of terrorism completely without a chance to fight back. All of our moves were the military unmanned aircraft control closely and any risk would all be extinguished by howitzer Akatsiya. After only 20 minutes of military robots attack, the militants have fled the chaos, leaving the armament. On the high mountains of 754.5 Latakia, Syrian soldiers counted 70 gunmen killed, Syrian troops have no losses, 4 wounded.

The first time in the history, Russian army use military robots Argo and robots Platforma-M attack the mountain Latakia in Syria

Armored robot “Platforma-M”
Research and development corporations NITI Progress Izhevsk has designed and built the complex military robots Platforma-M based on the tracked chassis. Armored robot was equipped with 4 anti-tank grenade launcher or ammo 7.62 mm machine gun, pressure heat Kalashikov. The purpose of the tactical requirements of the Platforma-M is to attack the targets fixed and mobile military. In addition, the robot can perform other tasks such as reconnaissance and patrolling the area. The robot can also perform the duties of battalion, open road through the defensive minefields. The activities of research and development of robot combination lasts many years, robot pass every test and put into application in the test unit. We are prepared for the production order line.

Terrain military robot Argo.
Terrain military robot ArgoResearch Center-engineering design technology application study control and Russian robotist has developed robotic Argo military complexes. Argo is combination remote control. ARGO has the purpose required to conduct reconnaissance activities, support the troops. The car was equipped with weapons to destroy troops, the enemy’s fighting vehicles. In addition, Argo robot made light transport duties. ARGO weighs about a ton, length 3.4 m, width 1 m, height 1.65 m on land vehicles can run up to speeds of about 20 km/h, Wade at a speed of 4.6 km. reserve operating time of 20 hours. The vehicle can install the module contemporary weapons remote control: present module is using a mounted machine gun, 7.62 mm Kalasnhikov, 7 3 anti-tank grenade RPG-26, two grenade RSG-2.

Sources :
http://www.armyrecognition.com/weapons_defence_industry_military_technol...
https://russiandefpolicy.wordpress.com/tag/andromeda-d/
http://www.todaynews24h.com/russian-military-robots-join-against-terrori...
http://sputniknews.com/military/20121224/178372572.html
http://www.debka.com/article/25170/Russian-robots-on-the-ground-for-four...

According to an article published in the Rheinische Post on 2nd January 2016, the motor manufacturer Daimler reported that it had built 180,000 Sprinter vans in 2015 – 5000 more vehicles built than in the previous year – at the company’s manufacturing plant at Derendorf in Düsseldorf. The boom in sales of Daimler’s Sprinter van is the result of an increasing demand for parcel and package delivery services, driven by the expanding market of online retailers such as Amazon and Zalando.

However, this increase in productivity and sales has not led to greater job security for the workers at the Düsseldorf factory. The management of Daimler has decided to build a new Sprinter factory at Charlestown, South Carolina in the USA, which will produce Sprinter vans for the United States, Canadian, and Mexican markets. Up until now the company’s factory in Germany has been manufacturing vans which have been exported to North America. The result of the Daimler’s new manufacturing plant in the United States will be the redundancy of 650 workers out of a workfore of 6500 at the factory in Düsseldorf.

Daimler seems to have been distracted by the short term boom in logistics services both in Europe and North America, without considering the long term sustainability of its business model. Once a delivery company buys a new van, it has that van for use for perhaps five or more years. So demand will suddenly drop once the market is saturated. A thriving logistics industry could also be threatened by another recession. At the moment Germany’s economy appears to be in a strong position, but that could change if more jobs are lost in traditional industries. The online retail industry depends upon the wages of customers, who work in companies like Daimler, to buy the products that are delivered to the customers’ homes.

The price of crude oil may be very low at the moment, but as more consumers in the world feel the effects of climate change, then there will be grater demand for vehicles driven by cleaner fuels. Daimler is already committed to the transition from fossil fuels to other fuels such as hydrogen produced from renewable forms of energy. The company is a partner in the Hydrogen Mobility Europe (H2ME) project, which aims to expand the network of hydrogen refuelling stations across Europe, and at the same time increase hydrogen-fuelled transport. In five years time, when the Sprinter vans with diesel engines made during the boom year of 2015 come to be replaced, then all of the vans manufactured by Daimler at the Düsseldorf factory should be hydrogen fuel cell vehicles. Instead of making 650 workers redundant at the factory in Germany, Daimler should retrain and redeploy these workers along with the rest of the workforce at the factory to build the new vans with hydrogen fuel cells.

Sources

Breitkopf, Thorsten (02.01.2016) ‘Daimler meldet 180.000 Sprinter gebaut’, Rheinische Post.

http://www.itm-power.com/news-item/hydrogen-mobility-europe-launched-with-e32m-funding

©Jolyon Gumbrell 2016

The post How can Daimler’s delivery van boom be made sustainable? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

“There will never be a good a solid constitution unless the law reigns over the hearts of the citizens; as long as the power of legislation is insufficient to accomplish this, laws will always be evaded“  Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1772).

You can have the best political institutions in the world but if the people who live within them do not want to use them properly, then those institutions will not work.  The challenge is to make people want to use common institutions properly and to agree on what constitutes proper use.  This is the challenge that Jean-Jacques Rousseau tackled in his “considerations on the government of Poland and on its proposed reformation.”  It is the same challenge advanced industrial democracies face today — at all levels of government.  Moreover, better institutions or ‘structural reforms’ were not the answer for Rousseau and they are not the answer now: “Although it is easy, if you wish, to make better laws, it is impossible to make them such that the passions of men will not abuse them as they abused the laws that preceded them.”

When I listen to politicians like Wolfgang Schäuble or Jeroen Dijsselbloem talk about ‘moral hazard’ and the need for everyone to ‘follow the rules,’ I can see immediately that they have not understood the problem that people have to believe in the rules first.  And when I hear about politicians like the late Helmut Schmidt deriding the need for ‘vision’ saying things like “people who have visions should see a doctor,” then I know we are in trouble.  People have to want to follow rules or they will find a way around them.  People only want to follow rules if they believe those rules are fair and just; they also have to believe that following the rules is useful.  Moreover, ‘following the rules’ restricts freedom and requires discipline. This means that people have to have some justification for collective action and common sacrifice.

When you add this all up – fairness, justice, effectiveness, purpose – you come up with a pretty complicated set of ideas that people need to receive and accept if they are to make institutions function.  Maybe ‘vision’ is not the most appropriate metaphor to describe this requirement to explain why politics works the way it does, particularly in a democratic system.  ‘Ideology’ is probably even more uncomfortable in the modern vernacular.  But whatever we call it, we need to come up with some way to get people to believe they are all part of a bigger project.  Democracy without solidarity does not work.

The examples of democracy suffering from a lack of solidarity are all around us.  As someone who spent a long time studying Belgian politics, my first instinct is to point to the 550 days that the New Flemish Alliance complicated efforts by the country’s elites to form a government.  That crisis only ended when the pressure in government bond markets was intense enough to focus attention on the very bad things that would happen if events spiralled out of control.  The debate that took place in the United States Congress over the debt ceiling during the summer of 2011 is another illustration.  But as we look more deeply into the functioning of the two Houses of Congress over the past few years, it is easy to see that the debt ceiling debate is just the tip of the iceberg. As Thomas Mann and Norman Orenstein describe it, the U.S. political system is “even worse than it looks.”

The Belgian and U.S. examples show two aspects of the pattern.  One is the argument about legitimacy.  This is where politicians or protestors claim that the current arrangement is unfair, unjust, ineffective, or headed in the wrong direction.  Here you can think of just about any stump speech by Donald Trump, Marine Le Pen, Nigel Farage, or Beppe Grillo.  Clearly these speeches resonate with some part of the electorate.  Depending upon the country, you can usually mobilize between 15 and 25 percent of the vote around the general message of disenchantment; in some cases the appeal is even broader.

The second aspect is how the message translates into action. This is the part I try to capture with ‘solidarity’ (and its absence).  When solidarity weakens or diminishes, people start breaking rules or reinterpreting them in ways that exaggerate the worst features of any institutional  arrangement.  They begin using exclusive (or offensive) speech patterns which they justify as a break from the confines of ‘political correctness.’  They start dividing the world into ‘us’ and ‘them’.  And they find ways to hold the functioning of institutions hostage until their specific concerns are addressed.  Such actions are standard practice for Beppe Grillo’s ‘Five Star Movement’ but they are also what brought Ted Cruz such notoriety when he entered the U.S. Senate (following Nigel Farage’s playbook from the European Parliament).

Unfortunately, democratic institutions are not very good at channelling or constraining this kind of disruptive behaviour.  On contrary, democracy thrives in a context where speech is free and institutions operate under ‘checks and balances’.  This is the perfect environment for a loss of solidarity to spark a crisis of governance and yet we risk losing the essence of democracy whenever we try to use new rules to proscribe such unruly behaviour.  It is a delicate and difficult balance — as you can see by looking at countries like Hungary, Poland and Turkey.

The balance is even harder to find when you look at federal countries or multinational arrangements.  It is no accident that the two easiest examples of the problem we face (Belgium and the United States) are both federal countries.  But the implications for the European Union are even more dramatic.  In the end, I do not see a scenario where the United States collapses into a collection of smaller political units.  Even Belgium is showing significant resilience and the New Flemish Alliance is participating in the federal government without demanding further devolution of power to Flanders (for now).

By contrast, the European Union is facing an existential crisis.  The knee-jerk European response is always more rules, better enforcement, and structural reform.  These are good responses in many situations.  Unfortunately, this is not one of them.  Too many Europeans do not believe that the rules are just or fair, they do not understand the need for collective sacrifice (or that the sacrifice is truly ‘collective’), and they do not think the solutions being offered are going to be effective.  You can see this in debates about macroeconomic policy, financial regulation, migration, and the single market.  You can see this in the language that is being used to divide Europe into north and south, east and West, creditor and debtor.  And you can see that both protest groups (including anti-European parties) and national governments are starting to use the institutions of Europe to jam up the process of governance until they get what they want for themselves.

Europe as a whole is not a democracy but it shares many democratic strengths and weaknesses.  Free speech, freedom of assembly, and institutional checks and balances are at the top of both lists.  The collapse of solidarity in Europe is threatening to break the union into pieces.  If Europe’s politicians don’t start focusing their attention on coming up with an argument to explain how Europeans are all in this together, why they need to work with one-another, and where this great project is going, then they will have to live with the consequences of their inaction.  This is what David Cameron promised when he raised the whole prospect of a national debate on Europe in his Bloomberg speech.  Unfortunately, that conversation has deteriorated into a debate about details rather than focusing on the big picture.  National politicians need to tell the big story about Europe if they are to capture ‘the hearts of the citizens,’ in Rousseau’s turn of phrase.  Whether we call that a ‘vision’, an ‘ideal’, or an ‘ideology’ is less important than winning the argument about Europe’s importance.  The same is true for democracy itself.

First published on February 13, 2016 at Prof. Erik Jones’ Personal Webpage.

The post Democracy without Solidarity appeared first on Ideas on Europe.