Diplomacy & Crisis News

Charlie Gao

Nuclear Weapons, Europe

The Soviets developed the 2A3 in response to American nuclear artillery.

Here's What You Need to Know: The entire concept quickly became obsolete.

In the 1950s, both NATO and Warsaw Pact doctrine focused on the employment of tactical nuclear weapons. Truly strategic nuclear weapons and the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) were at their infancy at the time, so nuclear weapons were seen as a tactical as well as a strategic tool.

As a result, both the United States and the Soviet Union developed a multitude of battlefield nukes, from the tiny Davy Crockett nuclear recoilless rifle to the M65 Atomic Cannon. The Soviet Union responded in kind, beginning the development of their own massive atomic howitzers and even mortars.

The largest of these pieces was the massive 406mm Soviet 2A3 “Kondensator.” But in the end, this piece was a failure. It was mechanically complex and obsolete by the time it was adopted.

Why did the Soviet Union produce these massive white elephants? Can anything be learned from the folly of the 2A3? Why was the caliber so huge compared to American guns?

The story of the 2A3 begins in 1954. The United States had rolled out the 280mm M65 atomic cannon just a year before, and the Soviets needed to catch up. Their response came in two forms, the 406mm howitzer (2A3/Object 271) and a 420mm mortar (2B1/Object 273).

The initiative to develop these two weapons was approved by the Council of Ministers in April 1955. The first ballistic test barrel was completed later that year, and in December 1956 the first prototype was created by mating the gun with the chassis. The design was paraded on Red Square in 1957.

The chassis for the 2A3 was derived from the T-10 heavy tank with additional hydraulic shock absorbers to absorb the massive recoil force of the 406mm projectile. Despite these measures, the 2A3 would travel a few meters back with every shot, and inevitably something would break and minor repairs would have to be conducted.

Aiming the gun was largely achieved by rotating the chassis, although small precision adjustments could be made with a limited electric traverse mechanism.

The reason for the massive caliber of the cannon was simple: Soviet engineers at the time weren’t sure if they could construct compact nuclear ammunition, so a large caliber was specified to make the design of the nuclear projectile easier.

The final projectile design weighed 570kg and could be launched out to a range of around twenty-five kilometers, just a few less than the M65 Atomic Cannon and far less than modern conventional artillery. The whole vehicle weighed around sixty-five tons.

As a result of this massive weight, the 2A3 was incredibly slow and faced significant mobility challenges; it couldn’t travel across most bridges and its massive size meant that it couldn’t really travel through cities or even under some low hanging power lines.

The range was also found to be lacking relative to nuclear rockets or modern tactical missiles. As a result, production of the 2A3 was cut off after only four units were produced in favor of newer nuclear rocket such as the Luna (FROG-7). These missile systems were far more mobile and compact relative to the massive 2A3 and had almost triple the range at seventy kilometers.

The Soviets developed the 2A3 was a response to American nuclear artillery. Unfortunately, as its development dragged on the entire concept became obsolete.

Perhaps what can be learned is that in making “big” guns and rockets, it’s always best to keep an eye on upcoming technologies that could fundamentally alter the battlefield such guns might fight on.

The Soviets would continue developing tactical nukes for use in artillery, but later shells utilized miniaturized warheads that allowed nukes to fit in compact projectiles in the Soviet-standard 152mm and 203mm calibers. Likewise, the United States also made nuclear shells in the 155mm and 203mm calibers after abandoning the 260mm M65 cannon.

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 2019.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Peter Suciu

Hypersonics,

Northrop Grumman recently completed its critical design review of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor which could help achieve this goal.

Here's What You Need to Remember: A concern for the United States is that it is now trailing its near-peer adversaries in the development of hypersonic weapons. China recently tested a hypersonic missile, while Russia has conducted multiple tests of its Tsirkon hypersonic missile over the past year.

Northrop Grumman announced this week that it had recently completed its critical design review of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor (HBTSS) prototype for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The defense contractor said this review established the company’s technical approach for precise, timely sensor coverage to defeat ballistic and hypersonic missiles.

With the upgrade, the HBTSS satellites will be able to provide continuous tracking and handoff to enable targeting of enemy missiles launched from land, sea, or air. The HBTSS satellites serve as a critical part of the Overhead Persistent Infrared (OPIR) multi-layered constellation of satellites. That constellation can sense heat signatures to detect and track missiles from their earliest stages of launch through interception.

Northrop Grumman’s HBTSS satellites were also designed to track threats with near-global reach when prompted by other OPIR systems, which would be well before they come into view of U.S. ground-based defenses.

“When it comes to national safety, there’s no room for error,” Sarah Willoughby, vice president, OPIR and geospatial systems, Northrop Grumman, said in a release. “This critical design review puts Northrop Grumman on track to deliver a vital component of our missile defense architecture to keep the U.S. and its allies safe against hypersonic threats.”

Combating Hypersonic Threats

Hypersonic missiles have been seen as a potential gamechanger because they would be difficult to track and even more difficult to counter.

“In the early stages of a conflict, hypersonic weapons can be used to take out high-value targets such as air defense systems, command and control centers, and supply depots to cripple any offensive capabilities,” said Tushar Mangure, defence analyst at data and analytics company GlobalData, in an email to the National Interest.

“Among the various technologies required to counter this, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is aggressively working on developing a HBTSS and Northrop Grumman’s prototype will play a vital role in ensuring US supremacy in the missile defense arena in the coming decades,” Mangure wrote. “The HBTSS will be part of a space-based multi-layered satellite network for missile detection and tracking.”

A concern for the United States is that it is now trailing its near-peer adversaries in the development of hypersonic weapons. China recently tested a hypersonic missile, while Russia has conducted multiple tests of its Tsirkon hypersonic missile over the past year.

The development of HBTSS satellites could help address the threat – even if it couldn’t actually stop it from coming.

“The lead that China and Russia have in hypersonic technologies is of serious concern to the U.S.,” Mangure wrote. “While arming the services with a hypersonic weapon is important, the U.S. has factored in the need to defend against these incredible weapons. Considering the speeds at which these weapons travel, trying to detect, track and intercept hypersonic weapons is a difficult task. Such multi-layered space-based sensors are expected to solve those issues, but there’s a long way to go before these weapons can be intercepted.”

Additionally, HBTSS satellites will likely be just one part of a larger effort in countering hypersonic missiles.

“The Space Development Agency (SDA) is also developing low-orbiting satellite constellations capable of detecting missile threats beyond the purview of traditional sensors,” Mangure wrote. “SDA is working with MDA to integrate the HBTSS into its missile tracking layer. A combination of medium and wide field of view sensors will be critical in tracking hypersonic missiles.”

Northrop Grumman had previously received a $153 million contract from the MDA for the Phase IIB portion of the HBTSS program. The defense contractor is reported to be on schedule to deliver the HBTSS prototype in 2023. After the HBTSS prototype is delivered, the company will conduct an on-orbit test to demonstrate its ability to continuously track and rapidly process its observations of hypersonic threats, as well as its ability to effectively hand off the information so the missile is intercepted.

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.

This article was published last month and is being reposted due to reader interest. 

Image: Reuters

Kris Osborn

U.S. Air Force, United States

The Air Force is paring down its fighter fleet to save costs. Where does that leave its aging fleet of F-16s?

Here's What You Need to Remember: The future fighter force strategy is aimed at pivoting the Air Force away from a largely 1980s-era legacy aircraft to a modern group of fighter jets that can outmatch and destroy enemy fifth-generation aircraft and air defenses operated by major “peer” adversaries such as Russia and China.

The Air Force’s sixth-generation stealth fighter will replace its F-22 Raptor fighter jets. The F-15 EX Eagle II will bring a weapons load in support of air combat. Additionally, F-35 fighter jets will replace hundreds of legacy fourth-generation fighter jets while various F-16 Fighting Falcon jets will be upgraded with new technology to absorb missions that don’t require a fifth-generation fighter. 

These developments comprise the fundamental essence of the Air Force’s plan for its future fighter force structure, a strategy that seeks to adjust the current number of 7 different fighter fleets down to four-plus-one.  

“We are sitting on seven fighter fleets and it’s expensive, so we are getting down to four fleets. We’ve brought on more than three hundred F-35s and they are now the second-largest fleet in our fighter fleet,” Lt. Gen. David Nahom, the Air Force’s deputy chief of staff for plans and programs, recently told The Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies.  

The specifics of the four-plus-one plan include the addition of the sixth-generation aircraft, continued development of the F-35 fighter jet as the cornerstone of the force, adding the F-15EX Eagle II to the mix and upgrading the F-16 Fighting Falcons. That’s four types of aircraft with the “plus one” portion being a reference to the A-10 Warthog. Nahom explained that the F-22 Raptor jets will continue to be upgraded with new software, weapons and sensors so that they can fly for several additional decades—or at least until sufficient numbers of the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) sixth-generation aircraft arrive.

“NGAD will ensure air dominance, yet the F-22 will remain a dominant platform. We will continue to upgrade it, yet there will come a time when we will need a new platform,” Nahom said.

As for the F-16 Fighting Falcons, Nahom explained it will remain crucial for homeland defense and other missions which do not require fifth-generation aircraft. The Fighting Falcons will be getting new active electronically scanned array radars and function as a multirole fighter jet in missions that, as Nahom put it, the Air Force doesn’t “need a high-end platform for.”

Fundamentally, the future fighter force strategy is aimed at pivoting the Air Force away from a largely 1980s-era legacy aircraft to a modern group of fighter jets that can outmatch and destroy enemy fifth-generation aircraft and air defenses operated by major “peer” adversaries such as Russia and China.

“Our fighter force was designed for a Soviet force,” Gen. Mark Kelly, the commander of Air Combat Command, said at the 2021 Air Force Air, Space & Cyber Conference. “We are behind and our current incremental rate of change is insufficient. Fighter Roadmap is a change in investment priorities required for a peer fight. The fighter force will again need to flex from its original design to defeat a peer threat. We need to face the realities of a new threat environment and that requires the fighter force to change.” 

The evolving plan seems to signify that the arrival of multirole fighter jets such as the F-35 stealth fighter jet means that fewer aircraft designs will be used to accomplish a wider range of missions. The F-35 jets are arriving in larger numbers. These jets can perform air-to-air attacks, long-range targeting and sensing, air-dropped bomb runs, and close air support missions. The NGAD sixth-generation aircraft, while expected to function as a high-speed, stealthy air-dominance platform to out-perform an F-22 Raptor, may also incorporate certain multirole capabilities. This means that hundreds of older F-15 Eagles and F-16 Raptors are likely on the fast track to the aircraft boneyard.  

Kris Osborn is the defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Master’s Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

This article first appeared in October 2021 and is being republished due to reader interest.

Image: Reuters.

Peter Suciu

S-500, Eurasia

Both countries are expected to purchase the missile defense system. 

Here's What You Need to Remember: It could make sense that China would have interest in such a platform as it continues to assert its position in the South China Sea. Where things get a little complicated is that India could be the first potential buyer for the S-500 “Triumfator-M.” Yet the fact that potential adversaries China and India have both expressed interest doesn’t seem to be a serious reason for concern for Russia at this point.

While Russia and China are not officially allies, the two nations remain partners when it comes to military hardware. Even as China has built up its domestic arms industry, Beijing has continued to turn to Moscow for aircraft engines and air defense systems.

That partnership is poised to continue. China and some former Soviet states could be among the first buyers of the advanced S-500 anti-aircraft missile system.

The mobile surface-to-air missile/anti-ballistic missile system was developed by the Almaz-Antey Air Defence Concern to replace aging A-135 missile systems currently in use. The S-500 is considered a step up from the S-400 Triumf, but would supplement that platform rather than replace it. It has a range of around six hundred kilometers and is reportedly able to target hypersonic cruise missiles as well as stealth aircraft. Analysts claim the S-500 could even target satellites in low-earth orbit.

It could make sense that China would have interest in such a platform as it continues to assert its position in the South China Sea. Where things get a little complicated is that India could be the first potential buyer for the S-500 “Triumfator-M.” Yet the fact that potential adversaries China and India have both expressed interest doesn’t seem to be a serious reason for concern for Russia at this point.

“We consider India, as well as China and all the states that we have long-standing, partner and predictable relations with as prospective buyers of this latest system,” said Dmitry Shugayev, Director of Russia’s Federal Service for Military-Technical Cooperation, in an interview with RBC media on Tuesday, according to a report from state-owned media outlet TASS.

India has been a longstanding strategic partner of Russia, Shugayev added. New Delhi has long employed Russian-made hardware including tanks, small arms, and aircraft. Its current naval flagship of the Indian Navy, INS Vikramaditya, is also a former Soviet aircraft cruiser that was sold to New Delhi in 2004.

India also purchased the S-400 Triumf.

“We have concluded a contract for the S-400 and they will receive the first battalion set of this system by the yearend [sic],” said Shugayev. “That is why it is quite logical that they will display their interest in the foreseeable future and request the S-500 from us as well.”

Even as Russia is lining up potential foreign customers, it could be some time before any of the advanced air defense systems are exported. Russia is expected to begin exporting the S-500 surface-to-air missile system after the required number of systems is actually delivered to the Russian troops. In September Reuters reported that Russia completed tests of the S-500 surface-to-air missile system and has started supplying it to the armed forces.

“Time will show when this happens,” said Shugayev. “We will examine potential requests individually in each specific case.”

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.

This article was originally published last month and is being reposted due to reader interest. 

Image: Reuters.

Peter Suciu

Submarines, Eurasia

The remaining Antey-class submarines will undergo an upgrade that will extend the service life by a decade.

Here's What You Need to Remember: The submarine Irkutsk, which was commissioned in December 1988, is now the first to undergo the modernization to 949AM version at the Zvezda shipyards in the Russian Far East.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Navy operated a sizable submarine force. After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Russian Navy fell into hard times and that included its fleet of submarines. In recent years, Moscow has committed to building new subs, while modernizing the older boats.

Among those aging submarines that have gotten a new lease on life are those of Project 949 Granit and Project 949A Antey (NATO reporting names Oscar I and Oscar II). A total of twenty of the nuclear-powered cruise missile submarines were originally planned with the first commissioned in 1980. Since then six were canceled—including four that were never laid down. Two of the canceled boats had their respective parts used in the construction of newer submarines, while the hulls have remained intact and construction could be restarted in the future.

Four of the aging boats have been retired, while the 949A boat Kursk was lost in an accident in the Barents Sea in August 2000, killing all 118 personnel on board.

Modernization Efforts

The remaining Antey-class submarines will undergo an upgrade that will extend the service life by a decade. The submarine Irkutsk, which was commissioned in December 1988, is now the first to undergo the modernization to 949AM version at the Zvezda shipyards in the Russian Far East.

“The modernization of the [underwater] cruiser will make it possible to extend its service life by at least ten years and expand the Pacific Fleet’s combat potential,” Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said at the ministry’s conference call on Tuesday, TASS reported.

During the refit, the nuclear-powered submarine Irkutsk (K-132) will be outfitted with the latest missile, torpedo, and radio-technical armaments and advanced communications systems to boost its combat efficiency. Among the planned upgrades will be the addition of a universal launch complex system that will enable the submarine to carry and launch Tsirkon (Zircon) hypersonic missiles.

While work on the boat has been slow going, the participants in the Defense Ministry’s conference call reportedly address the problems in the work to put the submarine into operation, including the timeframe of the necessary sea trials after repairs and modernization. Irkutsk is currently scheduled to be handed over to the Pacific Fleet in 2022.

A second submarine of the class, Chelyabinsk has been laid up since 2008 but could be the next to be upgraded.

More Power Boats

The Russian Navy Main Command had previously announced plans to have seven Project 949A and Project 949AM Antey subs in service with the Northern and Pacific Fleets by the end of 2023. As noted, the modernization will greatly improve all of the Antey-class submarines strike capabilities. This would include the capability for each boat to carry forty-eight Kalibr-PL missiles, as well as Oniks or Tsirkon hypersonic missiles.

While the efforts to modernize the aging submarines are still only slowly moving forward, each could be a formidable platform when—perhaps if—the modernization is actually completed.

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.

This article was originally published last month and is being reposted due to reader interest. 

Image: Reuters

Peter Suciu

M60 Tank, Taiwan

The M60 is old, but not down for the count just yet. 

Here's What You Need to Remember: The Taiwanese Army recently announced that it will upgrade the equipment and systems on many of those M60A3s. The plan's partial upgrades are scheduled to begin next year to strengthen the second-generation main battle tanks’ (MBTs) combat and defense capabilities.

If the People's Liberation Army were to mount an invasion of the self-governed island of Taiwan, it would face many aging tanks, including hundreds of M60A3s. The Taiwanese Army recently announced that it will upgrade the equipment and systems on many of those M60A3s. The plan's partial upgrades are scheduled to begin next year to strengthen the second-generation main battle tanks’ (MBTs) combat and defense capabilities.

The Liberty Times reported this month that the National Chung-Shan Institute of Science and Technology (NCSIST) will conduct the work as part of a contract worth NT$444.01 million (US$15.9 million) spread over three years. If the Taiwanese Army is satisfied with the quality of the work on the first batch of tanks, it will then order a large-scaled upgrade of the systems.

The Legacy of Patton

While not officially part of the Patton series of tanks, the United States Army has considered the M60 – officially "Tank, Combat, Full Tracked: 105-mm Gun, M60," – to be an improved descendant of the Patton tank's design. It first entered service in 1959 and has been steadily upgraded and improved over the years. The M60 remains in use with some seventeen nations—a testament to the robustness of the design.

A total of 15,000 were built. The most common was the improved M60A1, which featured thicker armor and an upgraded ammunition stowage system. This was the most-produced American tank of the Cold War, and it wasn't just the U.S. Army that fielded them; the M60 Patton also saw service in the armies of 22 countries around the world. The U.S. Army retired its M60A3s in 1997, but around 1,700 are still in use with the Egyptian Army. Turkey and Israel operate around nine hundred and seven hundred of the tanks, respectively. Taiwan operates some four hundred and sixty M60A3s.

The Taiwanese Army's 586th Armored Brigade conducted drills in central Taiwan on Nov. 4. Those exercises featured the M60A3 tanks and other armored vehicles barreling down public roads and attracting the attention of passersby, the Liberty Times also reported.

Taiwan's Tank Force

In total, the Taiwanese military currently fields around 1,200 tanks. These include the M60s, but also some four hundred and fifty CM-11 Brave Tigers and two hundred and fifty CM-12s. The CM-11 pairs a modified M-48 Patton turret with an M-60 chassis. The CM-12 is an M-48 with the same modified turret as the CM-11.

In addition to the aging tank force, the island nation could get a boost from some much newer American hardware. In 2019, the U.S. State Department greenlit the sale of 108 M1A2T Abrams tanks, Stinger missiles, and related equipment to the island nation in a deal worth approximately $2.2 billion. However, even as Taipei could get newer tanks, it will likely maintain its aging tank force – because should the PLA attack, Taiwan will never every tank it can get.

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.

This article first appeared last month and is being reposted due to reader interest. 

Image: Reuters.

Richard Douglas

Guns,

The UDX and Buck Mark series pistols are definitely designed with accuracy in mind.

The Browning Buck Mark UDX is a .22LR pistol that’s going to punch you in the wallet, but treat you really, really right. It’s consistently been a favorite of anyone that likes .22s or anybody that gets their hands on it and I’m no exception. The Buck Mark UDX quickly shot to my current favorite .22 pistol in a matter of days. 

Off the bat, this pistol looks sweet. To break with my usual buying habits, I opted out of the “tacticool” looking variations and picked up something classy with wood grips. They look fantastic with the aesthetic of the gun and provide comfort even during long shooting sessions. As you pick it up, you can just feel that it’s cut of a different cloth. The slide is smartly designed with aggressive rear serrations and cocking finds that combine function and fashion. On top of that, you get bright and clear fiber sights that are perfect for target shooting.

The UDX and Buck Mark series pistols are definitely designed with accuracy in mind. It was clear as day when I was driving tacks at twenty yards. Keep in mind that I’m an expertly average shot, so this pistol had me feeling pretty good. Although if you want the stats, I was getting pretty consistent one-inch groups within twenty yards. Out past that got a little sketchy with groups opening up to three inches or so, but that was mostly my doing. Either way, you’ll find the accuracy not lacking in any aspect. The sights make it easy to hit your targets consistently and precisely. This accuracy makes it stand the rest and guarantees it won’t be sitting in a safe untouched for months.

Reliability was a bit rough. Don’t call me a liar just yet! Specifically, my break-in period was not great. Bulk ammo gave it a good bit of issues while higher quality and hotter loads ran better, but not perfect. The break-in period was pretty brief though and its reliability was improved dramatically. After around three hundred rounds or so, everything clicked and the UDX ran absolutely everything through it without any issue. That’s a trait not too often found in .22s since rimfire cartridges aren’t the most reliable thing out there.

I might not have a ton of practical use for .22s, but man, the Browning Buck Mark UDX makes me want to find something. Sure, it’s 500+ bucks but you can be certain that it’ll be money well spent. It excels in terms of accuracy which means it’s great for precision shooting whether that’s paper, steel, or whatever pests might be plaguing your gardens. The break-in period might briefly worry you, but with some TLC, it’ll run like a champ.

Richard Douglas writes on firearms, defense, and security issues. He is the founder and editor of Scopes Field, and a columnist at the National Interest, 1945, Daily Caller, and other publications.

Image: Reddit

If one seeks peace in the Caucuses, then there should be cultural and educational exchanges between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, not boycotts of Azerbaijan.  

Since they declared independence from the Soviet Union in the 1990’s, Azerbaijan has been a strategic partner of the United States.  Although too many Americans may not realize it, Azerbaijan is perhaps the one remaining friendly country that America has in the Caspian basin.  

As a secular multicultural majority Muslim nation that prides itself on its pluralism and religious tolerance, Azerbaijan sent soldiers to help the United States fight against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Furthermore, Azerbaijan has also been a full ally of the United States in the struggle against Islamist extremism, serving as a major transit point for American military supplies to Afghanistan and elsewhere. 

Azerbaijan has also been a strategic partner against Iranian hegemony in the Middle East, as their recent war against Armenia fundamentally weakened Iran as Armenia’s main road to the Islamic Republic was cut off, which adversely affected the mullah’s economy, forcing the Iranians to contemplate creating alternative trade routes.    It is critical to note that only an economically weakened Iran can be convinced to end its nuclear program that threatens the entire world.  Thus, the results of the Second Karabakh War where Iran got weakened in the Caspian Sea worked to America’s advantage.   

Yet following the recent border tensions between Armenia and Azerbaijan, American Senator Bob Menendez, chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called on the US to cut military aid to Azerbaijan despite all of these important facts.  However, to take such a measure would be detrimental to the United States.  

According to the Armenian lobbyist group ANCA, “The amendment (#4177) is one of three amendments to the Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that moves all references to presidential waiver authority of Section 907, a provision first put in place in 2001, and utilized by successive U.S. presidents – including President Biden.  Section 907 of the FREEDOM Support Act is an Armenian National Committee of America (ANCA) -backed measure that would effectively block U.S. military aid to Azerbaijan.” 

However, much of America’s aid to Azerbaijan very much serves American interests.  In recent days in an interview with Jam News, American Ambassador to Azerbaijan Lee Litzenberger stated that a number of American companies have expressed interest in helping Azerbaijan to demine the Karabakh region and he hinted that this is important for America’s national security as well: “They are ready to invest where there are appropriate conditions, and above all, open tenders.” 

According to him, American aid has been instrumental in helping Azerbaijan to not only demine but to engage in other defensive actions: “Azerbaijan has been provided with appropriate scanners, X-ray machines and other equipment. They are used not only on land borders, but also in the Caspian to protect marine infrastructure and oil platforms. This equipment allows Azerbaijan to protect its coast and its sea borders.”  The ambassador noted that this these defensive measures are important, as they help Azerbaijan to block the flow of drugs into Europe and other areas of the world, and defend the vital oil industry in the region: “We are interested in maintaining stability on Azerbaijan’s borders.”  

Thus, if US military assistance is cut off to Azerbaijan, then this would adversely affect not only demining efforts, but also Europe’s struggle against the drug trade, jeopardize energy security in the region and would weaken the recently signed peace agreement, which would adversely affect regional security as a whole.  It should be emphasized that one cannot build a stable peaceful secure society if any child who strays from the road to play soccer can get killed in a landmine.  One cannot build up a stable oil industry in the region that imports to America and Europe if there are landmines throughout vast areas of the country.  And most importantly, no peace agreement can last if one side is encouraging boycotts against the other side.

If America truly wants to encourage peace and stability in the Caspian region, then they should ignore Armenian calls for boycotts of Azerbaijan’s military and instead call upon both Armenians and Azerbaijanis to build up academic exchanges between both countries, so that Armenian and Azerbaijani students can study each other’s culture and language.  Only via the existence of cross-cultural exchanges like this can the peace last between both sides.  Encouraging boycotts just undermines peace, demining efforts and the security of Azerbaijan and the region, as it struggles against radical extremism.   Thus, I call upon America to continue to support one of its few allies in the Caspian Sea and to ignore the ANCA initiatives. 

Geopolitical problems don’t have technical solutions.

Biden is failing to live up to his promise of democratic renewal, but many of the obstacles are beyond the president's control.

A Yazidi Refugee in 2016 in Northern Iraq.

 

It is not the first time someone like Nadia Murad was ignored by those in an institution, a city or a country when they wanted to make them aware of their experiences. Societies did not develop in an instant, and rights for individuals and within a community took generations to develop. Constitutions and modern states were born after others failed, and even then, people moved forward to improve basic rights and educate others on what being human means. In that process, we learned how to value others.

During those generations, the people that are the ancestors of Nadia Murad endured hardship just trying to survive in what we now refer to as Northern Iraq. In 2021, those who call themselves educators want to make sure that her culture, one of the oldest in the world, disappears from the world by silencing her in a country that claims to be a benefactor of those generations of rights.

Nadia Murad is the United Nations representative of the women and girls of the Yazidi people. Nadia, and those like her are the most brutalised women in modern history. Speaking up about the atrocities endured by her and her people won her a Nobel Prize, but a school board in Canada’s largest city does not want to hear anything from her. It appears that they never understood why Never Again matters. They are the most uneducated group of individuals in modern history it seems, and while this story has gone international in order to shame them into a moral position, in their own country it is not considered that newsworthy.

Should we be disturbed that a Western democracy that was built on the ideas of human rights can treat the victims of Genocide in such a fashion? Perhaps looking at their recent track record of ignoring another Yazidi refugee that was silenced by those who should help her when she ran into her torturer in a Canadian city should surprise us, but it was not a major story. A plan to create a Covid vaccine with China’s military was approved by the Government while knowledge of human rights atrocities against the Uyghurs was evident, but Concentration Camps in 2020 wasn’t newsworthy either it seems. A day that was created to recognise their own county’s past acts of human rights abuses against Indigenous children was ignored by their own leader while he went on a vacation of privilege, even though his own father may had a role in those acts. Could it be possible that these attitudes permeated into the Toronto’s District School Board when they wanted to silence Nadia Murad as well? Sadly, there are many more examples that makes those who are tied to refugees in that country feel unwelcome and unsafe.

The Holocaust Museum in Washington DC was established to not only educate others on how the Holocaust came to be, but also to acknowledge and promote education on other atrocities that have taken place in modern history. The purpose of it is clear:

Never Again applies to all victims of Genocide.

This education is important because it acts as a barrier to future Genocides. Responding by silencing victims further entrenches the act itself, as Genocide is committed to silence and exterminate a people, their culture and their lives. Its purpose is to erase history, and the educators in Toronto responsible for silencing Nadia Murad are re-victimizing all of the Nadias in every community that have ever experienced acts of discrimination and extermination. Ignoring brutality are why Human Rights Atrocities become a reality. The reason why the Armenian Genocide did not stop further crimes against humanity only a few years later is because even in 2021, some nations deny it ever took place.

This concept is so crucial that Germany decided to enshrine Holocaust Denial into their legal system as a criminal act. The German people did not all believe in the tenets of Fascism, but assuming that an education on those facts would be offensive to Germans is to assume all individuals had an interested role in the application of that Fascism. The real offense is to presume their acceptance of falsehoods. Unfortunately, some educators in Canada still do not grasp this concept.

The creator of Mosul Eye, Professor Omar Mohammed lived in Mosul, Iraq when ISIS took over his beloved city. A professor that was ejected from his university under ISIS, he secretly lead a video protest and online campaign to bring hope to the people of his city living under the fascism experienced after the takeover of Northern Iraq. He and most people in Mosul did not accept a life under fascism. Iraqis who experienced what he did are not ever going to silence Nadia Murad or anyone like her. This is true because he is a real educator and a survivor.

How to avoid a Balkan-style catastrophe in the Horn of Africa.

Why the United States and its Allies Must Act Now to Prevent a Humanitarian Disaster

Biden’s summit must confront the scourge of false narratives.

Après les attentats qui ont ensanglanté la France, de nombreux responsables politiques ont érigé en modèle la gestion par Tel-Aviv des questions de sécurité. Pourtant, dans la société israélienne comme dans les territoires occupés, la réponse militaro-policière au terrorisme a montré ses limites. / Israël, (...) / Israël, Armée, Armement, Défense, Démocratie, Droit international, Droits humains, Économie, Exclusion sociale, Sécurité, Justice, Police, Politique, Racisme, Palestine (Gaza), Répression, Colonisation - 2016/10

Au début de l'année 2009, défilés massifs et conflits sociaux se succèdent en France métropolitaine ; dépourvue de dynamique, la mobilisation s'effiloche. Au même moment, à 6 700 kilomètres de distance, une grève générale contre la vie chère embrase la Guadeloupe. / Guadeloupe, Capitalisme, Solidarité, (...) / Guadeloupe, Capitalisme, Solidarité, Syndicalisme - 2009/11

Deux sujets sont au cœur de l'élection présidentielle : l'immigration et le libre-échange. Contrairement aux anciens présidents, M. Donald Trump fustige la libre circulation des marchandises, qu'il accuse de nuire aux travailleurs nationaux. Il rejoint en cela le « socialiste » Bernie Sanders ou la (...) / États-Unis, États-Unis (affaires intérieures), Élections, Immigrés, Libéralisme, Parti politique, Personnalités, Politique, Travail - Amérique du Nord

Moscow threatens war to reverse Kyiv's pro-western drift.

Si de nombreux élus, chercheurs ou militants diagnostiquent une « crise de la démocratie », le mal pourrait se révéler plus profond : l'installation rampante d'un nouveau régime politique, la gouvernance, dont l'Europe est le laboratoire. / France, Démocratie, Élections, État, Idées, Politique, Société (...) / France, Démocratie, Élections, État, Idées, Politique, Société civile - 2016/10

Contrairement à un scénario bien ficelé depuis des décennies, la France n'a pas reconnu immédiatement l'élection, contestée et suivie d'émeutes, du président gabonais le 31 août dernier. Il s'agit d'un tournant dans l'histoire de ce petit pays d'Afrique centrale, symbole d'une « Françafrique » (...) / Afrique, France, Élections, Mouvement de contestation, Gabon, Afrique centrale, Répression, Autoritarisme, Coopération bilatérale - 2016/10