Agrégateur de flux

Comentario Elcano 35/2015 - 19/5/2015
Ruth Ferrero-Turrión
Los incidentes en Kumanovo pueden ser del interés del gobierno de Nikola Gruevski, quien ante las cívicas manifestaciones contra su gobierno haya visto una oportunidad en el miedo al conflicto étnico.

GBU-53/B, aka. SDB-II
(click to view full)

The 250 pound GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb gives American fighters the ability to carry more high-precision GPS-guided glide bombs, without sacrificing punching power against fortified targets. The initial award to Boeing was controversial, and the Darlene Druyun corruption scandal ultimately forced a re-compete of the Increment II development program. Whereas the initial GBU-39 SDB-I offered GPS-guided accuracy in a small and streamlined package, the goal of the GBU-53 SDB-II competition was a bomb that could hit moving targets in any weather, using a combination of guidance modes.

For the SDB-II competition, Boeing found itself allied with Lockheed Martin, its key opponent for the initial SDB-I contract. Its main competitor this time was Raytheon, whose SDB-II bid team found itself sharing its tri-mode seeker technology with a separate Boeing team, as they compete together for the tri-service JAGM missile award against… Lockheed Martin. So, is Raytheon’s win of the SDB-II competition also good news for its main competitor? It’s certainly good news for Raytheon, who wins a program that could be worth over $5 billion.

Raytheon’s GBU-53 Small Diameter Bomb SDB-II: cutaway
(click to view full)

Raytheon’s GBU-53/B SDB-II is 7″ in diameter around the tri-mode (laser, IIR, radar) seeker, with a clamshell protective door that comes off when the bomb is dropped. A GPS receiver adds a 4th targeting mode. The bomb tapers to about 6″ diameter beyond the pop-out wings, and is about 69.5″ long. The wings remain swept back when deployed, and are about 66″ across with a 5 degree anhedral slope. The bomb weighs about 200 pounds, and all of these dimensions are important when trying to ensure that the US Marines’ F-35B, with its cut-down internal weapon bays, can still carry 4 of them per bay.

The US Navy is developing a Joint Miniature Munitions BRU to address internal F-35 carriage, and SDB-II also fits on BRU-61 external bomb racks. No word yet on whether the JMM BRU will also fit in the USAF’s F-22A, which is also slated to deploy this weapon.

Range is expected to be up to 40 nautical miles when launched at altitude, thanks to a high lift-to-drag ratio in the design. Since SDB-II is an unpowered glide bomb, its actual range will always depend on launching altitude and circumstances. An F-22A would be able to extend that range significantly by launching at supercruise speeds of Mach 1.5, for instance, as long as the bomb proves safe and stable at those launch speeds.

SDB-II’s Attack Modes: Seekers & Sequences SDB-Is on F-15E
(click to view larger)

Once a target is picked by the pilot, initial communication and GPS coordinates are transmitted between the aircraft and the SDB-II bomb using the Universal Armament Interface (UAI) messaging protocol, which was designed to make integration of new weapons easier. The post-launch datalink will be Rockwell Collins’ TacNet, a 2-way, dual band link that enters the network quickly using encrypted UHF radio frequencies from the ground or secure Link-16 from the launching aircraft, and provides both weapon and target status to the shooter. TacNet’s datalink software is programmable if other frequencies/waveforms need to added in future, and Raytheon cites a message speed of 38 messages per minute as further evidence of the system’s ability to keep pace with future needs. Link-16 makes the weapon part of a much larger system, and gives SDB-II the ability to be dropped by one platform and then targeted or re-targeted by another. The bomb can also be sent an abort command, if necessary. If the link is lost, the bomb will continue with its mission, using its own on-board seekers.

Raytheon’s SDB-II contender uses a close precursor of the tri-mode seeker technology featured in the joint Raytheon/Boeing bid for the JAGM missile, which adds some refinements. The SDB-II uses jam-resistant GPS/INS targeting like Boeing’s GBU-39 SDB-I, but its added seeker features 3 modes of operation: semi-active laser, millimeter-wave radar, and uncooled imaging infrared. By combining these 3 modes, the GBU-53 can have excellent performance against a variety of target types, under any weather conditions, while making it much more difficult to use countermeasures or decoys successfully:

GBU-53 uses IIR/MMW
click for video

Semi-active laser guidance. This is standard for a wide range of missiles and rockets, and offers the best on-target accuracy and assurance, especially in urban environments. Its flip side is problematic performance through heavy fog, sandstorms, etc. That’s where GPS/INS guidance to a specified coordinate, and the next 2 fire-and-forget modes, come in.

Millimeter wave radar will operate through any weather. It’s especially good at distinguishing metal targets and noting movement, and is used in weapons like AGM-114 Hellfire Longbow missiles to give them “fire and forget” capability. These days, most people probably hear the term and think of airport scanners.

Imaging infrared (IIR) This was adapted from the much larger AGM-154 JSOW glide bomb, and uses high-resolution thermal scans to create a target picture. It also helps with target identification, and offers better performance against some kinds of targets like humans. By using an uncooled IIR seeker, the bomb lowers both its cost and its maintenance requirements. The uncooled seeker also allows snap-attacks against targets that present themselves quickly, since the it doesn’t need any time to cool down before it begins to work.

GBU-53 uses laser
click for video

Once launched, the SDB-II relies on a sophisticated package of internal computing and algorithms that are designed to get the most out of its tri-mode sensors, and make the process of launch and targeting as simple and flexible as possible for the pilot. The GPS/INS system or datalink messages guide the bomb toward the target during the initial search phase, while the tri-mode seeker gathers initial data. A revisit phase combines information from all of its sensor modes to classify targets. That’s especially useful because the SDB-II can be told to prioritize certain types of targets, for example by distinguishing between tracked and wheeled vehicles, or by giving laser “painted” targets priority.

SDB-II warhead test
(click to view full)

Different targets require different warhead types, which is why the GBU-53 contains a warhead from General Dynamics Ordnance & Tactical Systems that delivers shaped charge, blast and fragmentation effects all at once. A scored blast and fragmentation warhead makes it deadly against buildings and people as well.

This warhead was actually redesigned mid-way through the development phase, as the USAF added a requirement to destroy main battle tanks. That initial hardship became a positive experience, as the redesign actually ended up shrinking Team Raytheon’s bomb’s size, and improving its manufacturing costs.

SDB-II: The Program

As of 2013, the Boeing SDB-I/ GBU-39 Small Diameter Bob program was finished production at 12,300 weapons, and 2,000 BRU-61 bomb racks. Another 350 specialized Focused Lethality Munitions use carbon fiber bodies to deliver more near-field blast and less collateral damage; their last order was in FY 2012. Going forward, SDB-II is expected to be the default buy.

The overall program target for SDB-II is about 17,000 weapons over about 11 years: 12,000 bombs for the USAF, and 5,000 for the US Navy. Initial fielding will take place on USAF F-15E Strike Eagles, and F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets, even though the USMC and US Navy’s F-35B/C Block 4s are technically the program’s 2nd “threshold aircraft. Software development issues are likely to push F-35 fielding to 2022 or later in practice. Planned candidates for future fielding include F-16, F-22A, and F-35A multi-role fighters; B-52, B-1B, and stealth B-2A bombers; and MQ-9 Reaper drones.

Special Operations Command is even considering it for their AC-130 gunships, though they aren’t an official “objective” platform just yet. SDB-II was also supposed to equip the USAF’s A-10C close support planes, but the Pentagon is battling Congress to cancel the program.

The GBU-53 may also feature integration with other fighters, if the bombs are sold abroad. Raytheon isn’t in discussions with any foreign buyers yet, and doesn’t foresee the US government releasing the weapon for export discussions and sales before Low-Rate Initial Production begins in late 2014.

SDB-II schedule, 2010
(click to view full)

The SDB II Program is currently a $450.8 million Fixed Price Incentive Firm-type Engineering and Manufacturing Development contract. F-15E integration is being accomplished by Boeing in St. Louis, MO through the F-15 Development Systems Program Office using Air Force SDB II funding. The F-35B and F-35C aircraft integration contract will be awarded to Lockheed Martin in Fort Worth, TX by the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter JPO using Department of the Navy SDB II funding.

Elements of the SDB-II design have been tested, but putting the entire weapon together with its carrying aircraft and declaring the combination ready for fielding is still a development effort. Although many military development efforts are “cost-plus” (contractor’s costs plus an agreed percentage), the US military issued the SDB-II EMD Phase development contract as a fixed-price contract with incentives. The targeted flyaway cost per unit during Full Rate Production was $FY05 62-81k, but that doesn’t include amortized development costs; just the bomb, container, and shipping. Current Pentagon documents indicate that $FY19 100-125k per unit is likely.

Right now, the key challenge is making it through the development process successfully. The program is progressing well, but in FY 2011 it hit a funding shortfall from Congress that has crimped its progress. Past and projected budgets include:

Raytheon’s Industrial Approach

Before it won the SDB-II development contract in 2010, Raytheon had secured firm-fixed price quotes in for 90% of required materials from its suppliers, and conducted detailed planning for whole program that includes reservations for setbacks and project margins. These are necessary steps for any fixed-price development program, but this is a good illustration of the fact that it’s often the work done before contracts are signed that determines a program’s fate.

In terms of the industrial team, Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ will be the final assembly center, with key items and assemblies coming in from several supply-chain partners:

• General Dynamics OTS: Fuze and dual-mode shaped charge blast/fragmentation warhead.
  
• Klune Industries: Overbody.
  
• Rockwell Collins: TacNet dual-band (Link-16, UHF), 2-way datalink.
  
• Raytheon Dene at NAPI, NM: Aft section.
  
• Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ: Tri-mode seeker.
  
• The program also uses Goodrich and Cobham to make the bomb’s deployment mechanisms, and Celestica will be manufacturing circuit cards.

Raytheon executives said that they took a somewhat different supply-chain approach to the SDB-II, picking suppliers early and then working directly with them to improve productivity at every step. While Raytheon prototyped their final assembly line, and began using lean production techniques to reduce the amount of “touch labor” and improve productivity, they brought in suppliers to do the same thing. For instance, Celestica engineers were embedded with the team, in order to run their own producibility tools on circuit card designs and refine them to improve yield and costs. Rockwell Collins, who makes the datalink, did the same thing. This is not uncommon in general manufacturing, but defense manufacturing has traditionally been more stovepiped.

Within Raytheon itself, another key industrial choice involved the uncooled infrared seeker. As noted above, uncooled infrared has lower performance than cooled infrared designs, in exchange for snap-attack capability, better reliability, and lower production and maintenance costs. If Raytheon wanted to use this aproach, they would have to begin early, and take a risk. Their engineers worked to adapt the IIR seeker in their 2,000 pound AGM-154 JSOW as a starting point, and they did eventually produce a version that fit SDB-II, was cheaper to manufacture, and more than met government requirements.

Raytheon’s initial team during development will be about 300, but this is expected to drop below 50 for production phase – in part because Raytheon has already used lean techniques, and focused from the beginning on creating a design that was simpler to manufacture.

Minimum Sustaining Rate for production is just 30 weapons/ month, with normal production at 117 and maximum surge production rising to 250/ month. Projected American buys through FY 2019 never top 140/month, which should leave plenty of room for export orders.

Contracts and Key Events FY 2012 – 2014

Cheaper than expected – but F-35 lateness could endanger that; F-35 is biggest risk; Phase 1 testing done; GAO Report. The biggest risk
(click to view full)

Oct 28/14: JMM. Raytheon Technical Services LLC in Indianapolis, IN a sole-source $35 million indefinite-delivery/ indefinite-quantity contract for F-35 integration of the Joint Miniature Munitions Bomb Rack Unit (JMM BRU), including integration and life cycle technical support throughout the technology development and engineering, manufacturing and development (EMD); and EMD F-15 flight test and production phases.

Work will be performed at Indianapolis, IN and is expected to be complete by Aug 31/21. USAF Life Cycle Management Center at Eglin AFB, FL manages the contract (FA8672-15-D-0054).

June 26/14: Testing. Raytheon and the USAF have concluded a series of SDB-II GTV flight tests using the IIR/MMW seeker, culminating in direct hits on stationary land targets. Those can be harder to hit than moving targets, which naturally stand out more against fixed object ground clutter.

The GTVs are full GBU-53 rounds, but with telemetery in place of the warhead. Raytheon says that there have been other Guided Test Vehicle shots between October 2013 and this announcement, including moving target shots, as part of the testing program. Live-fire shots with full warheads are expected in August or September 2014. Sources: Raytheon, “Small Diameter Bomb II nears end of development phase”.

April 16/14: Exports. The Pentagon releases is next set of Selected Acquisition Reports, which includes a reference to exports:

“SDB II is a Defense Exportability Features (DEF) pilot program and meetings were held on January 15, 2014 with the DEF Program Office, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics), Office of the Director, International Cooperation and Raytheon Missile Systems (RMS). The Program Office is working with RMS to incorporate a Phase II approach for implementing design changes to support exportability requirements. The Program Office briefed the Tri-Service Committee on January 16, 2014 and a favorable decision memorandum was received on February 4, 2014.”

March 31/14: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2013, plus time to compile and publish. Our program dashboard has been updated accordingly. SDB-II still has good looking cost figures and a stable design, with 11/12 sub-system (all but the seeker) passing qualification testing. Bad news? There are a couple of flaws that need to be fixed, and its schedule is out of margin.

The System Verification Review has slipped 7 months to August 2014, due in part to 2 test failures (cover stuck on seeker, navigation error). They’ve also found a leak in the warhead case, and seeker encoders that died under vibration testing. The seeker encoders have a fix ready by the time the GAO report closed, but not the case leak. Meanwhile, the program resumed testing again in October 2013, and the 3 tests since went well. They need 11 total successful flight tests to pass Milestone C into low-rate production, including 2 live fire events. It amounts to 7 successful flight tests remaining over 5 months.

March 4-11/14: FY15 Budget/ R&D. The US military slowly files its budget documents, detailing planned spending from FY 2014 – 2019. The “flyaway” cost per SDB-II is expected to hover around $242,000 in FY 2014, but costs are expected to drop to around $125,000 by FY 2018. Totals are reflected in the chart above. The reports also call attention to the development of an new internal bomb rack for the Navy, which is considered to be part of the program’s overall R&D:

“The Joint Miniature Munitions Bomb Rack Unit (JMM BRU) is an Air Force (AF) led ACAT III program. It is required for the Department of the Navy’s (DoN) carriage of the SDB II weapon in the internal bay of the F-35B and F-35C…. The BRU-61/A, currently in production in the AF, does not meet the needs to operate with SDB II within the F-35 internal bay in the DoN environment. The JMM BRU, designated BRU-61A/A, fills the capability gap….”

No US Navy buy totals are given in the detailed budget justifications, but the Budget Briefing contains the expected figures for FY 2017 – 2019; which indicates that the USN will be buying SDB-II at the USAF’s flyaway cost. This USAF budget justification excerpt is also relevant:

“As a result of the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) (F-35) programs restructure, SDB II integration was moved from the JSF Operational Flight Plan (OFP) Block 3 to Block 4. IOC is FY2020.”

The program office hasn’t officially changed the date, in other words. F-35 OFP Block 3F operating software might be ready by 2020, but the Norwegians have been told to plan for 2022 – 2024 as the window for actual fielding of F-35s with operational Block 4 software, and hence Kongsberg’s new JSM anti-ship missile.

Jan 28/14: DOT&E Testing Report. The Pentagon releases the FY 2013 Annual Report from its Office of the Director, Operational Test & Evaluation (DOT&E). The SDB-II is included in passing:

“This project addresses the inaccuracies in engineering models to predict sympathetic detonation of solid rocket propellant when subjected to non?reactive fragments and shaped charge threats. The Air Force 780th Test Squadron tested the ability of the small diameter bomb [DID: SDB-II in the labeled picture] warhead to detonate 122 mm rocket motors. The test results were compared with predictions from Sandia National Laboratories’ Combined Hydro and Radiation Transport Diffusion Hydrocode by Applied Research Associates. Analysis is ongoing, and is expected to enable further development of concepts and methodologies for enhanced vulnerability, lethality, and survivability in the area of insensitive munitions and non-reactive materials.”

Oct 29/13: Testing resumes. Raytheon announces that the USAF has concluded its series of test flights with the SDB-II GTV, using the bomb’s Imaging Infrared and Milimeter-Wave Radar guidance and culminating in “direct hits on targets moving at operationally representative speeds.” Next? System Verification Review and a Milestone C decision, which is behind schedule.

This is actually the 1st set of tests following a 6-month testing moratorium, which was prompted by seeker cover and navigation failures in previous tests. The firm says that the USAF has invested over $700 million in the program so far. Sources: Raytheon, Oct 29/13 release.

March 28/13: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs“. Which is actually a review for 2012, plus time to compile and publish. Overall, SDB-II is a stable design with maturing technologies. It successfully completed a test in its most difficult Immediate Attack sub-mode, but another test failed when the front sensor’s protective dome cover refused to come off.

They’re working on that urgently, as more delays to the Milestone C/ LRIP (Low-Rate Initial Production) decision risk re-negotiation of the Pentagon’s LRIP-1 through LRIP-5 production contract years. If so, it would raise costs that had come in substantially under budget. Meanwhile, Raytheon will build 50 GTV bombs for testing and live fire before beginning Low-Rate Initial Production, which is expected to involve a whopping 40% of planned GBU-53 lifetime orders (math says about 6,800 bombs).

Unfortunately, SDB-II/ GBU-53 has been affected by the F-35’s lateness, which has forced postponement of SDB-II’s Full Rate Production decision by another 2 years, to 2020. The GPS-only SDB-I will now integrated with the F-35 2 years ahead of the SDB-II, and so will other weapons with more sensitive thermal and vibration requirements. That will help the Pentagon discover whether the F-35s conform to their design documents, or whether weapon changes will be required in several weapon types including the GBU-53. Meanwhile, SDB-II will deploy aboard the F-15E.

Jan 22/13: Testing. Raytheon touts a successful fit check of the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II in the F-35A, with 4 GBU-53s loaded alongside an AIM-120 AMRAAM missile. Essentially, the 4 SDB-IIs replace one 2,000 pound JDAM.

The weapons seemed to have adequate space, though flight testing will be needed to be sure. The F-35B will be a more challenging test, because its internal bay is smaller.

July 17/12: Testing. An F-15E Strike Eagle flying over White Sands Missile Range, NM launches a GBU-53/B, which successfully engages and hits a moving target using its tri-mode seeker’s IIR and radar sensors. Raytheon.

March 30/12: GAO Report. The US GAO tables its “Assessments of Selected Weapon Programs” for 2012, which include the GBU-53. Overall, the GAO sees good progress, with 97% of design drawings releasable by the 2011 Critical Design Review, and serious efforts to achieve manufacturing maturity before production. As with any early stage EMD program, however, risks remain. The biggest may be Congressional management of weapons procurement:

“A postdesign review identified several risks related to weapon effectiveness verification, target classification, seeker reliability, and JSF [F-35B/C Block 4] integration. The program office is working to address each of these risks… However, the program’s biggest risk – integration with the JSF – will not be resolved until after [low-rate initial] production begins… The SDB II program office is managing a $53 million funding shortfall in fiscal year 2011, which could have programmatic and contractual implications. The SDB II contract is an incrementally funded, fixed-price incentive contract, and program officials stated that the funding shortfall could mean that the next part of the work will have to be deferred or the contract will need to be renegotiated or terminated.”

March 30/12: SAR shows success. The Pentagon’s Selected Acquisitions Report ending Dec 31/11 includes the SDB-II, and validates many of Raytheon’s releases:

“Small Diameter Bomb Increment II (SDB II) – Program costs decreased $994.1 million (-19.1%) from $5,206.6 million to $4,212.5 million, due primarily to a decrease in the estimate to reflect actual contract pricing (-$994.3 million).”

That’s 23.6% less than the baseline estimate, a very impressive achievement for any weapons program.

Good contract

Nov 16/11: Testing. Raytheon says that things are going very well for the SDB-II’s warhead, and the entire program is on cost and ahead of schedule:

“After building the test warheads on the production line, engineers put the warheads through an accelerated conditioning regime equivalent to 500 flight hours and 20 years of aging in a bunker, followed by live detonation testing… [It] performed at twice what was required…”

Nov 8/11: Industrial. Raytheon announces that its engineers have used design changes and other improvement approaches to cut the time for building SDB-II uncooled tri-mode seekers almost in half, from more than 75 hours to 40 hours. This is part of Raytheon’s efforts to meet their promised prices.

FY 2010 – 2011

Raytheon wins; Program baseline set; Early industrial work & tests. SDB-II test pod
(click to view larger)

Aug 16/11: Industrial. Raytheon announces that they’ve built their 5th GBU-53 tri-mode seeker in its new automated factory, which is dedicated to tri-mode seekers. That specialization may be helpful to other programs as well. Tom White, Raytheon’s SDB II program director, says that:

“Building integrated tri-mode seekers is much more complicated than just putting together three unrelated sensors, and our fifth build proves Raytheon is the only company with the technical expertise to manufacture [them]… We’re meeting predicted component build times, and as we continue to mature the program, we will find other efficiencies and cost savings we will pass on to the customer.”

Aug 8/11: Testing. Raytheon says that a series of laboratory tests on the SDB-II’s tri-mode seeker “demonstrated that it exceeds anticipated performance parameters.” Good job.

July 28/11: Support. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a maximum $70 million firm-fixed-price contract to provide Small Diameter Bomb II technical support. The AAC/EBMK at Eglin Air Force Base, FL manages the contracts (FA8672-11-D-0107).

April 4/11: CDR. Raytheon announces that the SDB II program completed a USAF critical design review (CDR), clearing the way for the weapon to begin captive flight testing later in 2011.

CDR

Nov 15/10: SAR Baseline. The Pentagon releases its Selected Acquisition Report for the September 2010 reporting period. With respect to SDB-II, the total expected program cost is listed as $5.21 billion, if it continues through planned production:

“This was the initial SAR following Milestone B approval authorizing the program to enter the engineering manufacturing and development (EMD) phase in August 2010. The EMD phase contract was awarded to Raytheon Missile Systems for $450.8 million. [The gating decision for] Low Rate Initial Production (Milestone C) is planned for August 2013.”

Program baseline

Nov 2/10: Sub-contractors. Rockwell Collins announces what Raytheon had already confirmed: its TacNet datalink will be part of the GBU-53.

Rockwell Collins’ TacNet data link system is a small form factor, dual-channel, 2 waveform terminal that enables in-flight target updates, retargeting, weapon handover coordination, bomb hit assessments and better cooperation with other networked platforms.

Aug 9/10: Contract. Raytheon Missile Systems in Tucson, AZ receives a $450.8 million contract to cover the GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb Increment II program’s engineering and manufacturing development phase. Delivery is expected to begin in 2013, with a required availability date in late 2014.

At first, the SDB-II will be integrated on the USAF’s F-15E Strike Eagles, the US Marines’ F-35B, and the US Navy’s F-35C aircraft. The F-35Bs should just be entering service by 2013, but the F-35Cs aren’t expected to enter service until after SDB-II deliveries begin. Raytheon Missile Systems president says that their design “fully meets the load-out requirements for all versions of the fifth generation F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s internal weapon bays.” SDB-II integration is also expected to extend to other USAF and US Navy aircraft and UAVs over time. At this time, $23.5 million has been committed by the Miniature Munitions AAC/EBMK at Eglin AFB, FL (FA8672-10-C-0002).

During the fly-off’s technical demonstration program, Raytheon had to prove that its compact tri-mode seeker could seamlessly transition between guidance modes, and demonstrate claimed performance and reliability. Raytheon says that their GBU/53-B seeker flew 26 missions in 21 days, without a single hardware failure. Raytheon.

Raytheon wins EMD Phase

FY 2009 and Earlier

Protest derails; New early-phase awards; Big design changes. SDB-I: separated.
(click to view full)

2008: Design shifts. Mid way through the 38-month risk reduction program, Team Raytheon is faced with challenges on 2 fronts. One challenge was the need to carry 8 SDB-II bombs in the cut-down internal bomb bay of the F-35B STOVL (Short Take-Off, Vertical Landing) fighter. That meant the weapon had to become shorter, always a challenge when space is at a premium. The second challenge came from the USAF, which wanted a weapon that could disable main battle tanks. That meant the blast & fragmentation warhead the team had begun with wasn’t going to work.

In response, GD OTS started work on an innovative ‘multi-effects’ warhead. It would use a shaped charge plasma jet to kill tanks, and a scored case design improved fragmentation effects to the point that USAF engineers reportedly dubbed it “the shredder.” Meanwhile, seeker electronics had to be repackaged in a way that provided a clear path for the plasma jet. As it happens, the warhead and seeker changes allowed the bomb to become shorter, and the seeker changes made it easier and cheaper to manufacture. Raytheon would go on to win the competition. Aviation Week.

April 17/06: Contracts. The Headquarters Air-To-Ground Munitions Systems Wing at Eglin Air Force Base, FL awards 2 cost-plus fixed-fee R&D contracts under the Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) Increment II, 42-month Risk Reduction Phase. The purpose of the Risk Reduction phase is to define and validate a system concept that meets the performance requirements outlined in the SDB II System Performance Specification. Successful tests with modified JDAM recently, and weapons like Israel’s Spice GPS/INS/EO “scene-matching” bombs, strongly indicate that success is possible. Solicitations began December 2005, negotiations were complete in March 2006, and work will be complete in October 2009. The 2 winners will be competing for selection in 42 months as the prime contractor for the SDB II program, which has a potential value of $1.3-1.7 billion.

Boeing subsidiary McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis, MO receives a $145.8 million contract (FA8681-06-C-0151). This is actually a Boeing/Lockheed venture as of October 2005; prime contractor Boeing will supply the weapon and data link system, while principal supplier Lockheed Martin provides the multi-mode seeker that lets it hit moving targets. That leaves Boeing’s original Small Diameter Bomb partner, Northrop-Grumman, out in the cold.

Raytheon Co. in Tucson, AZ received its own $145.8 million contract (FA8681-06-C-0152), and is competing on its own.

Risk Reduction Phase

Feb 18/05: GAO protest. The Congressional Government Accountability Office (GAO) sustains Lockheed Martin’s protest. It finds that Darlene Druyun had played a role in the bid process that led to changes in the bomb’s technical requirements, and the deletion of related evaluation criteria. The GAO recommends a re-opened competitive procurement for the program’s $1.7 billion second phase, which had previously been awarded to Boeing and Northrop-Grumman along with SDB-I.

In September 2005, the USAF decided to re-open the Small Diameter Bomb Increment II competition. Increment II was originally awarded to Boeing and Northrop-Grumman as part of the overall SDB award.

Protest sustained

Additional Readings

DID thanks Raytheon Missile Systems, including SDB-II Deputy Program Director Murali Krishnan and Jeff White of Air Warfare Systems, for their assistance. Any errors are our own damn fault.

• Raytheon – Raytheon GBU-53/B Small Diameter Bomb II (SDB II). Mini-site, including CONOPS videos.

• Stars and Stripes, via WayBack (Dec 6/11) – Some weapons too important to lose in DOD cuts.

• Raytheon (Aug 24/10) – Raytheon presentation and press conference [dead link, see event release]. Contained extensive discussion of their SDB-II design.

• Aviation Week, via WayBack (Aug 24/10) – Winning SDB II: Innovation in Action. By Raytheon’s Harry Schulte.

The Cooperation Council between the European Union (EU) and the Republic of Uzbekistan held its twelfth meeting on Monday, 18 May 2015. The Cooperation Council reaffirmed the commitment of both parties to see their bilateral relations strengthened across a number of areas and took stock of the progress made since the eleventh Cooperation Council between the EU and the Republic of Uzbekistan in March 2014, including in the implementation of the EU Strategy for Central Asia. 

The Cooperation Council underscored the intensification of the political dialogue between the EU and the Republic of Uzbekistan over the past years.  

The Cooperation Council reiterated its attachment to a comprehensive implementation of the EU Strategy for Central Asia both, on a regional and national basis, welcomed Uzbekistan's involvement in the EU regional initiatives for Central Asia and discussed possible orientations in relation with the current review of the EU-Central Asia strategy. The EU expressed its expectation to see Uzbekistan actively participate in the EU - Central Asia High Level Security Dialogue as well as in the EU regional cooperation projects on drugs (CADAP and border management (BOMCA).  

The Cooperation Council discussed important issues of interest to both parties, notably political reforms, rule of law and human rights, trade and economic relations, energy cooperation, education, regional cooperation in Central Asia and international issues.  

The EU welcomed Uzbekistan's readiness to discuss about human rights with the EU in an increasingly open fashion within the Human Rights Dialogue. Both sides reviewed the situation concerning human rights and fundamental freedoms in Uzbekistan, especially in key areas of concern to the EU. The EU welcomed the adoption of a National Action Plan aimed at ensuring the implementation of the recommendations accepted by Uzbekistan under the 2013 Universal Periodic Review exercise and strongly encouraged Uzbekistan to step up its cooperation with the United Nations to ensure that this Plan is properly implemented and duly monitored, in cooperation with international partners. The EU expressed its readiness to support Uzbekistan in this international cooperation exercise.  

The EU welcomed the increasing momentum in the cooperation between Uzbekistan and the ILO, in particular on child labour, and took note of the positive findings of the ILO regarding the 2014 cotton harvest, which corroborated the conclusions of the ILO High Level Monitoring Mission on child labour during the cotton 2013 harvest and the subsequent report of the ILO Committee of Experts of 2014. The EU welcomed the adoption in 2014 of a Decent Work Country programme between Uzbekistan and the ILO covering, in addition to child labour, wider labour issues. The EU called upon Uzbekistan to engage further with the ILO on the implementation of the ILO conventions and to address all outstanding labour issues pertaining to these conventions, in particular aspects related to forced labour. The EU welcomed the on-going constructive discussions between Uzbekistan and the ILO to this effect.  

The Cooperation Council emphasised the great potential of the economic and trade component of EU-Uzbekistan relations and discussed how to improve the business and investment climate. The EU reiterated its support for Uzbekistan's plan to accede to the WTO and its readiness to provide assistance to this aim. The Cooperation Council welcomed the progress already made towards the creation of a Business and Investments Council aimed at promoting bilateral trade and investments between the EU and Uzbekistan, and the readiness of both parties to establish this new body in the best possible delays.    

 The Cooperation Council noted the converging views of the EU and Uzbekistan as regards the main priorities of the on-going EU bilateral development cooperation with Uzbekistan, which is focused on the sector of rural development.  

The Cooperation Council emphasised the mutual interest of the EU and Uzbekistan in a strengthened cooperation in the field of energy and underlined the importance of an effective implementation of the bilateral Memorandum of Understanding on energy.  

In the area of education, the EU underlined the importance of EU programmes in higher education and technical and vocational education that could foster socio-economic development and encouraged Uzbekistan to actively benefit from these programmes. In this regard, Uzbekistan was invited to attend the first EU-Central Asia Education Ministerial conference in Riga on 25 and 26 June 2015.  

The Cooperation Council discussed regional cooperation in Central Asia and international issues, including Afghanistan. The Cooperation Council underlined the importance of regional cooperation in Central Asia as an effective means of conflict prevention and socio-economic development in the region. In this context, the Cooperation Council also underlined the importance for the Central Asian partners to seek a sustainable settlement regarding water management, security and energy issues in the region, which would take into account the interests of all countries and preserve the unity in the region, in line with the relevant international water conventions and the guiding principles of the EU Water Diplomacy adopted in July 2013.  

The Cooperation Council noted the importance of cooperation between the EU and Uzbekistan to promote regional stability and face external challenges.  

The Cooperation Council was chaired by H.E. Abdulaziz KAMILOV, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Uzbekistan. The EU delegation was led by H.E.Edgars Rinkevics, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Latvia on behalf of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy in her capacity as President of the EU's Foreign Affairs Council.  

 

 

1.      The global and European security environment has changed dramatically in recent years. This calls for a stronger Europe, with a stronger and more effective Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). The conflicts, threats and instability in the EU's immediate and wider neighbourhood, affecting inter alia Iraq, Libya, the Sahel, Syria and Ukraine, as outlined in the report from the High Representative, together with long standing and newly emerging security challenges, are significantly impacting European security as well as international peace and security, and challenging our fundamental values and principles. 

2.      By addressing these conflicts, sources of instability and other security challenges, the EU and its Member States are assuming increased responsibilities to act as a security provider, at the international level and in particular in the neighbourhood, thereby also enhancing their own security and their global strategic role by responding to these challenges together. The EU and its Member States, through the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) and other policies and instruments, have a strong role to play through the unique EU Comprehensive Approach to preventing and managing conflicts and addressing their causes.

1.           The forty-third meeting of the EEA Council took place in Brussels on 18 May 2015 under the Presidency of Ms Zanda Kalniņa-Lukaševica, Parliamentary State Secretary for EU Affairs of Latvia, representing the Presidency of the Council of the European Union. The meeting was attended by Mr Gunnar Bragi Sveinsson, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Iceland, Mr Vidar Helgesen, Minister of EEA and EU Affairs at the Office of the Prime Minister of Norway, and Ms Aurelia Frick, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Liechtenstein, as well as by Members of the Council of the European Union and representatives of the European Commission and the European External Action Service. 

2.           The EEA Council noted that, within the framework of the Political Dialogue, the Ministers would discuss 1) Ukraine and Russia; 2) the Eastern Partnership and 3) Syria, Iraq, Libya and ISIL- Da'esh, including combating radicalization and extremist violence in Europe. An orientation debate was held on the Digital Agenda.

3.           The EEA Council welcomed that the conclusions on a homogenous extended single market and EU relations with Non-EU Western European countries adopted by the Council of the EU in December 2014 acknowledged the key role played by the EEA Agreement throughout the last 20 years in advancing economic relations and internal market integration between the EU and the EEA EFTA States. The EEA Council highlighted that the Agreement had been robust and capable of adapting to changes in EU treaties and EU enlargements. The EEA Council recognised that the good functioning and further development of this extended Single Market would be a key driver for renewed growth in Europe.

4.           The EEA Council emphasised the need for responsibility and solidarity among the countries of Europe to overcome the social and economic challenges that had arisen from the economic crisis. In particular, the EEA Council expressed concern regarding the continued high level of youth unemployment in some EEA Member States. 

5.           Emphasising the fact that greater knowledge of the EEA Agreement throughout the EEA would be in the interest of all Contracting Parties, the EEA Council urged them to ensure that the appropriate information on the EEA Agreement was made readily and easily available to all.

6.           The EEA Council noted that free movement of capital is a fundamental internal market freedom and an integral part of the EEA acquis and acknowledged that restrictions can be implemented only temporarily on the basis of the provisions of Article 43 of the EEA Agreement.

7.           Noting the Progress Report of the EEA Joint Committee, the EEA Council expressed its appreciation for the work of the Joint Committee in ensuring the continued successful operation and good functioning of the EEA Agreement.

8.           The EEA Council stressed the need to swiftly conclude the work necessary for the incorporation into the EEA Agreement of the EU Regulations on the European Supervisory Authorities in the area of financial services to ensure effective and homogenous supervision throughout the EEA, as called for in the Conclusions approved by the EU and EFTA Ministers of Finance and Economy at their informal meeting of 14 October 2014. The EEA Council also highlighted the high importance of a swift incorporation and application of the outstanding legislation in the field of financial services in order to ensure a level playing field throughout the EEA in this important economic sector.

9.           Acknowledging the contribution made by EU programmes to building a more competitive, innovative and social Europe, the EEA Council welcomed the participation of the EEA EFTA States in EEA-relevant programmes to which they contribute financially. 

10.        The EEA Council recognised the still existing need to alleviate social and economic disparities in the EEA, as well as the positive contribution of the EEA and Norway Financial Mechanisms 2009-2014 and their predecessors in reducing economic and social disparities throughout the EEA. It noted that more than one year after the launch of the negotiations on the renewal of the EEA and Norway Financial Mechanisms for another term, the negotiations were still on-going and the progress achieved was still mixed. In light of the delay incurred, the EEA Council called for increased efforts in view of a swift conclusion of these negotiations. 

11.        The EEA Council also took note of the on-going negotiations in parallel with the Financial Mechanism negotiations on bilateral issues between each of the EEA EFTA States and the EU, and also called for a swift conclusion of these negotiations. 

12.        The EEA Council welcomed the ongoing efforts made to both reduce the number of EEA-relevant EU acts awaiting incorporation into the EEA Agreement and to accelerate the incorporation process. While commending all the steps undertaken in the course of the last years, the EEA Council noted that the number of acts awaiting incorporation was still too high. The EEA Council called for continued work in order to significantly and durably reduce the current backlog and thereby ensure legal certainty and homogeneity in the EEA. It urged all parties to engage constructively to find solutions to pending difficult issues.

13.        The EEA Council noted that progress was still needed on a number of outstanding issues and looked forward to reach a conclusion as soon as possible in particular regarding the Third Postal Directive, the 2009 TELECOM Package (including the Regulation on the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications - BEREC), the Directive on Deposit Guarantee Schemes, the Regulation on Novel Foods and Novel Food Ingredients, the Marine Strategy Framework Directive, the Regulation on Medicinal Products for Paediatric use and the EU legal acts in the area of organic production. 

14.        The EEA Council recalled that there was still a number of Joint Committee Decisions, for which the six-month deadline provided for in the EEA Agreement with regard to constitutional clearance had been exceeded. It encouraged the EEA EFTA States to strengthen their efforts to resolve the pending cases as soon as possible and to avoid such delays in the future. 

15.        With regard to the Third Package for the Internal Energy Market, the EEA Council underlined the importance of stepping up efforts to incorporate this legislative Package into the EEA Agreement in order to establish a fully functional internal market for energy, and in particular encouraged the parties to identify mutually acceptable solutions for appropriate EEA EFTA participation in the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER). 

16.        The EEA Council placed great importance on continued close cooperation between the EU and the EEA EFTA States in environment, energy and climate change polices, particularly in light of the 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy and the proposal for A Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy. The EEA Council underlined in particular the importance of the EU, its Member States and the EEA EFTA States working closely together to achieve an ambitious and universal climate agreement during the COP21 Conference in Paris in December 2015 in order to contain global warming within the limit of 2ºC. The close cooperation should also continue in particular in the areas of security of energy supply, emissions trading, promotion of competitive, climate resilient, safe and sustainable low carbon energy, energy efficiency, renewable energy resources, carbon capture, utilisation and storage (CCUS), marine environment and other environmental issues such as waste, chemicals, water resource management and industrial pollution.

17.        The EEA Council acknowledged the significance of the negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) between the European Union and the United States. The EEA Council welcomed the exchange of information between the European Commission and the EEA EFTA States initiated in the EEA Joint Committee in December 2014. Bearing in mind inter alia Protocol 12 to the EEA Agreement, the EEA Council encouraged a continuation of this exchange of information.

18.        The EEA Council acknowledged that the Contracting Parties, pursuant to Article 19 of the EEA Agreement, had undertaken to continue their efforts with a view to achieving the progressive liberalisation of agricultural trade. The EEA Council welcomed the launch in 2012 of negotiations on the further liberalisation of agricultural trade and on the protection of geographical indications between the EU and Iceland. The EEA Council also welcomed the launch of negotiations between the EU and Norway in November 2013 on the protection of geographical indications and on further liberalisation of agricultural trade within the framework of Article 19 in February 2015. The EEA Council noted that the EU had expressed its disappointment on the fact that the increased Norwegian customs duties for certain agricultural products, and the reclassification of hortensia, had not been revoked and that the EU had again encouraged Norway to reverse these measures. 

19.        The EEA Council welcomed the dialogue between Iceland and the EU on the review of the trade regime for processed agricultural products within the framework of Article 2(2) and Article 6 of Protocol 3 to the EEA Agreement in order to further promote trade in processed agricultural products and looked forward to the conclusion of this dialogue in the near future. The EEA Council encouraged the Contracting Parties to continue the dialogue on the review of the trade regime for processed agricultural products within the framework of Article 2(2) and Article 6 of Protocol 3 to the EEA Agreement in order to further promote trade in this area.

20.        The EEA Council underlined the importance of continuing the practice of inviting officials from the EEA EFTA States to political dialogues held at the level of the relevant Council working parties. 

21.        The EEA Council underlined the importance of inviting EEA EFTA Ministers to informal EU ministerial meetings and ministerial conferences relevant to EEA EFTA participation in the Internal Market, and expressed its appreciation to the current Latvian and incoming Luxembourg Presidencies for the continuation of this practice.

22.        The EEA Council recognised the positive contributions made by the EEA EFTA States to the decision-shaping process of EEA-relevant EU legislation and programmes through their participation in the relevant committees, expert groups and agencies, as well as through the submission of EEA EFTA Comments.

23.        The EEA Council noted the Resolutions of the EEA Joint Parliamentary Committee adopted at its meeting in Strasbourg on 17 December 2014 on Follow-up to the Climate and Energy Policy Framework 2030 and on the Annual Report of the EEA Joint Committee on the Functioning of the EEA Agreement in 2013, and the Resolutions of the EEA Joint Parliamentary Committee adopted on 31 March 2015 on The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership and its possible implications for the EEA EFTA States - Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway and on Industrial Policy in Europe.

The Council has agreed today (18 May) to establish an EU military operation - EUNAVFOR Med- to break the business model of  smugglers and traffickers of people in the Mediterranean.  This decision, which is one element of the comprehensive EU response to the migration challenge, will enable the formal start of the operational planning for the naval operation. 

EUNAVFOR Med will be conducted in sequential phases and in accordance with the requirements of international law.  Planning of the operation and the initial phase of surveillance and assessment of human smuggling and trafficking networks in the Southern Central Mediterranean will be conducted as soon as possible. The second and third phases of the operation would work to search, seize and disrupt the assets of smugglers, based on international law and in partnership with Libyan authorities.  

The operational headquarters of EUNAVFOR Med will be in Rome and Rear Admiral Enrico Credendino (Italy) has been appointed as Operation Commander. The common costs of the operation are estimated at €11.82 million for a two months start up phase plus an initial mandate of 12 months. 

The EU CSDP operation is part of a set of comprehensive measures aimed at responding to the immediate need to save lives, address emergency situations but also to tackle the root causes of irregular migration as requested by the European Council on 23 April 2015. 

The launch of the EU naval operation will be on the agenda of the Foreign Affairs Council in June.  

 

 

The Stabilisation and Association Council (SA Council) between Albania and the European Union held its seventh meeting on 18 May 2015. The meeting was chaired by Mr Edgars Rinkēvičs, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia, on behalf of High Representative / Vice President Federica Mogherini. The Commissioner for Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations, Mr Johannes Hahn, represented the European Commission. The Albanian delegation was led by Mr Ditmir Bushati, Minister of Foreign Affairs. 

This being the first SA Council following the European Council decision of 27 June 2014 to grant Albania the status of EU candidate country, the SA Council welcomed this very important milestone in the process of EU integration of Albania. This entails a strengthening of EU-Albania relations. 

The SA Council noted that the Commission 2014 Progress Report on Albania concluded that the country made further progress towards meeting the political criteria for membership, since the country adopted key judicial and public administration reform measures and took further steps in the fight against corruption and organised crime, as well as on human rights matters. 

The SA Council noted the conclusions of the General Affairs Council of 16 December 2014, which recognised Albania's commitment in the fight against organised crime, with intensified law enforcement activities resulting notably in increased amount of drug seizures, as well as in advancing judicial reform. The SA Council reiterated that the opening of accession negotiations will be considered by the European Council, in line with established practice, once the Commission has assessed that Albania has achieved the necessary degree of compliance with the membership criteria. Albania expressed the hope that the decision to open the accession negotiations will be made through a credible and predictable process, on the basis of the country's progress in the fulfilment of the five key priorities. The EU noted that some challenges still lie ahead. It underlined that Albania needs to intensify its reforms efforts, particularly in relation to the five Key Priorities, notably in the rule of law areas. The EU also encouraged Albania to consolidate achievements of the reforms already undertaken and to deliver a sustained implementation. 

The SA Council recalled that the EU remains fully committed to the EU integration of Albania and will continue to support the country in this process. The EU welcomed the engagement of the Albanian authorities to pursue the domestic reform agenda, as confirmed in the framework of High Level Dialogue meetings. 

The SA Council noted that constructive and inclusive political dialogue in parliament between the ruling majority and the opposition is essential for sustainability of European integration related reforms. In this context, the EU welcomed the 24 December 2014 cross-party political agreement and called on all Albanian stakeholders to ensure its responsible implementation. The SA Council also welcomed the establishment of the National Council of European Integration, chaired by the opposition, as an important instrument for an all-inclusive approach to EU-related reforms. However, the EU noted with concern persisting political tensions amongst political actors. 

The EU underlined the importance of ensuring that upcoming local elections are conducted in line with the relevant standards. The election administration bodies need to discharge their duties in an independent way and a thorough application of the relevant legislative framework must be ensured. The EU recalled that these elections provide an additional opportunity for Albania to demonstrate commitment to implement the December political agreement as regards addressing the issue of persons with criminal records in public office. 

The SA Council noted that the reform of the public administration remains a key priority for Albania and is also one of the fundamental pillars of the EU Enlargement process. The ability to take on the EU acquis is largely dependent on a de-politicised and efficient public administration. The EU welcomed the steps taken by Albania so far to implement the new Civil Service Law, but cautioned against any amendments to this law that could undermine the long-term perspective and commitment of Albania to develop a professional, merit-based and depoliticised civil service. The EU also welcomed the recent adoption of the Public Administration Reform Strategy for 2015-2020 and the new Code of Administrative Procedures, and called for their implementation. 

The SA Council noted that the reform of the judicial system remains a key challenge. The independence, impartiality, transparency, efficiency and accountability of the judicial system are central elements in the assessment of the political criteria for EU accession and key to ensure respect for the rule of law and progress in the fight against corruption and organised crime. The EU underlined the importance of a comprehensive and inclusive judicial reform process and encouraged Albania to continue its engagement with civil society and the European Commission for Democracy through Law - the Venice Commission - of the Council of Europe. 

The SA Council noted that the fight against corruption remains a key priority for Albania. The EU welcomed Albania's commitment to strengthen efforts to prevent and fight against corruption. The legislative framework and the policy coordination and monitoring have been strengthened, including through adoption of the anti-corruption strategy and action plan. The EU underlined the importance of the action plan's effective implementation, as well as its monitoring. The EU acknowledged the launch of an online web-portal where citizens can lodge complaints and denounce corruption cases, and it stressed the importance of the proper handling and follow-up of the cases. Establishing a solid track record of proactive investigations, prosecutions and convictions of corruption cases at all levels remains a key endeavour. 

The SA Council noted that the fight against organised crime remains a key priority for Albania. It noted some positive trends in a number of areas with an intensification of law enforcement activities, and called for these efforts to be stepped up in order to build up a solid and credible track record in dismantling organised crime networks and fighting against any form of criminal activities at all levels. The legal framework in place needs to be fully implemented, and obstacles to effective investigations must be removed, including through adopting amendments to the Criminal Procedure Code.  

The EU reiterated its commitment to the short-term visa free travel regime for Albanian citizens and noted the efforts of the Albanian authorities to ensure respect of the conditions attached to visa liberalisation. The EU noted however that manifestly unfounded asylum applications continued to be lodged by an increasing number of Albanian citizens to EU Member States and Schengen associated countries. The EU calls on Albanian authorities to implement both short- and long-term measures aimed at countering this negative phenomenon, including by following up to the last set of recommendations issued by the European Commission in the framework of the Post-Visa Liberalisation Monitoring Mechanism. 

The EU noted that Albania made efforts to strengthen the protection of fundamental rights, notably by improving the relevant legislative framework, and stressed the need of effective implementation. The EU called for further efforts, particularly by further strengthening the protection of persons belonging to minorities. In this specific policy area, adoption of a comprehensive legislative framework, in line with the relevant European and international standards, still remains an important achievement to be secured. 

The EU welcomed that Albania made some further progress towards becoming a functioning market economy. The EU noted that the Albanian economy continued to grow and that Albania maintained macroeconomic stability; however, the country still faces significant challenges. In line with Joint Conclusions of the Economic and Financial Dialogue between the EU, the Western Balkans and Turkey, Albania is invited to put further efforts of placing public finances on a sustainable footing, while preserving fiscal space for urgently needed growth-enhancing public investments. 

In the field of financial cooperation, the EU noted a satisfactory record in the implementation of most assistance projects. Progress was overall made on overcoming a number of outstanding difficulties. Yet, in some cases, problems related to timely allocation of sufficient appropriations from the Albanian state budget for operating expenses and maintenance still persist. The EU welcomed the full engagement of the Albanian authorities in preparing IPA II, in particular the good cooperation in the consultations for finalising the next period's strategic approach and in the preparation of the sector planning documents for IPA 2015. 

The SA Council welcomed the continued active participation of Albania in regional initiatives and structures in South Eastern Europe and its good neighbourly relations and constructive regional stance. In this context, the EU commended the Albanian Chairmanship in Office for the work and efforts invested so far in further strengthening the SEECP. It invited Albania to remain committed to a positive engagement in the region, including through the conclusion of bilateral conventions, and to further promoting regional cooperation. The EU reiterated that good neighbourly relations and regional stability are essential elements of the Stabilisation and Association process and cautioned  against  any  statements with  implications for good  neighbourly  relations. 

The SA Council welcomed the 100% alignment of Albania to CFSP declarations and Council decisions. 

The EU-Turkey Association Council held its 53rd meeting on Monday, 18 May 2015, in Brussels.

The meeting was chaired by Mr Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, Minister for Foreign Affairs of Turkey. He was accompanied by Mr. Volkan Bozkir, Minister for EU Affairs and Chief Negotiator. Mr. Edgars Rinkēvičs , Minister for Foreign Affairs of Latvia, led the EU delegation (on behalf of the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini). Mr Johannes Hahn, Commissioner responsible for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations, represented the European Commission. 

The meeting provided a timely opportunity to review EU-Turkey relations and exchange views on a range of issues. It reaffirmed the significance the EU attaches to its relations with Turkey, as a candidate country and a key partner for the EU. 

The EU commended the considerable efforts made by Turkey in hosting around 2 million refugees fleeing the violence in Syria and Iraq. In this context, the EU underlined that the very serious developments in the region, in particular in Syria and Iraq, render it crucial that dialogue and cooperation on foreign policy issues is increased. 

The EU proposed to develop closer cooperation against ISIL/Da'esh and its funding networks and to stem the flow of foreign fighters. 

The active counter-terrorism dialogue between the EU and Turkey was welcomed along with the exchange of best practice on the prevention of radicalisation and recruitment to terrorism. The EU also confirmed its intention to strengthen counter-terrorism cooperation and underlined the importance of developing police and judicial cooperation in the fight against terrorism.

Referring to the key issue of illegal migration, the EU reiterated its commitment to step up cooperation with Turkey on preventing illegal migration flows, as also expressed by the European Council on 23 April 2015. The EU also expressed concern about the significant increase in irregular crossings at the sea borders with neighbouring EU Member States. The EU recognised that border cooperation across the land border with Greece and Bulgaria had improved and expressed appreciation of the dialogue developed between the Turkish authorities and the authorities of Greece and Italy in addressing irregular migration across the sea. The EU encouraged Turkey to develop such dialogue into a fully-fledged cooperation with a view to prevent illegal migratory flows in the Aegean Sea and the Mediterranean and to fight against smuggling of migrants and trafficking in human beings. The EU also reiterated its expectations of full and effective implementation by Turkey of the EU-Turkey readmission agreement. 

With regard to the EU's relations with Turkey, the EU welcomed the renewed commitment of the Turkish government to EU accession. The EU underlined that active and credible accession negotiations which respect the EU's commitments and established conditionality, along with all other dimensions of the EU-Turkey relations, will enable EU-Turkey relations to achieve their full potential.

In this respect, the EU expressed  its clear position as regards the Additional Protocol of the Association Agreement. Full and  non-discriminatory implementation towards all EU Member States is an obligation and as such must be honoured. This implementation could provide a significant boost to the negotiation process. 

As emphasised by the Negotiating Framework, the EU expressed its expectations for Turkey to actively support the negotiations aimed at a fair, comprehensive and viable settlement of the Cyprus problem within the UN framework, in accordance with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions and in line with the principles on which the Union is founded. Turkey's commitment and contribution in concrete terms to such a comprehensive settlement remains crucial. Under the current circumstances, the EU considers it more important than ever to ensure a positive climate with a view to the resumption of negotiations for a comprehensive Cyprus' settlement. The resumption on settlement talks on 15 May 2015 was welcomed by the EU. As stated in its conclusions of March 2014, the European Council has expressed its readiness to play its part in supporting the negotiations.

Regarding the domestic situation in Turkey, the EU extended its strongest political support to the renewed efforts towards a peaceful settlement of the Kurdish issue and encouraged further engagement by all parties to move the process forward. 

Concerning the ongoing reforms, the EU welcomed the continued implementation of reforms adopted in previous years, and in particular measures announced in the September 2013 democratisation package.  The EU, however, expressed concern with undue interference by the executive in the judiciary, frequent changes to key legislation without due consultation of stakeholders, and restrictions on access to information. Reforms should provide for adequate checks and balances fully guaranteeing freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. Reforms, including on a new constitution, should be prepared in line with European standards, so as to meet fully the Copenhagen criteria.

Concerning economic cooperation, the EU recalled the strong economic links between Turkey and the EU and the need to develop a high level economic dialogue. Progress under chapter 17 - economic and monetary policy would in due course further support such dialogue and encourage alignment with the acquis.

Finally, the Association Council reviewed the state of relations under the Association Agreement and the Customs Union. In this context, the EU reiterated its commitment to engaging constructively with Turkey to maximise the potential of the Customs Union and to resolve outstanding disputes.

To date, the Obama administration’s claims of progress in the campaign against the Islamic State (IS) have been accompanied by qualifications and caveats. In January, the Pentagon claimed to have killed 6,000 IS fighters since the September start of “Operation Inherent Resolve,” a statistic that became less impressive when later that month it was reported ...

La confrontation se poursuit entre le gouvernement nationaliste et l’opposition sociale-démocrate macédonienne. Des dizaines de milliers de personnes ont manifesté lundi soir à Skopje leur soutien au Premier ministre Nikola Gruevski, une démonstration de force du camp du pouvoir au lendemain d'une journée de mobilisation de l'opposition de gauche réclamant sa démission. Les supporters de l’opposition qui campaient toujours lundi soir devant le siège du gouvernement.

Nato has successfully completed its anti-submarine warfare (ASW) exercise, Dynamic Mongoose, off the west coast of Norway, with the support of ten allied nations alongside partner nation Sweden.

Newport News Shipbuilding (NNS), a division of Huntington Ingalls Industries (HHI), has achieved a milestone in the construction of the US Navy's Virginia-class submarine Indiana (SSN 789), with the keel laying ceremony.

The European Union has reportedly approved plans to conduct a military operation to tackle the human trafficking networks that smuggle migrants through the Mediterranean Sea.

The US Navy's P-8A Poseidon integrated test team (ITT) has successfully carried out air-to-air refuelling (AAR) ground testing.

The State Department on Monday shrugged off a decision by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to appoint Silvan Shalom, a politician who has publicly opposed the creation of a Palestinian state, as his chief negotiator for the long-stalled peace talks.

The stories of two Sunni leaders — one a tribal chief, the other a former insurgent — show why locals opposed to the Islamic State and Iraqi officials in Baghdad have so far failed to unite against their common foe.

Chinese military officials say their massive land reclamation in the South China Sea is all about establishing peace and stability. Washington isn’t buying it.

Manifestation anti-Gruevski en Macédoine : « c'est avant l'aube que la nuit est la plus noire »
Macédoine : une marée humaine contre le gouvernement à Skopje
Manifestations anti-Gruevski en Macédoine : « rendez-vous tous les jours à 6 heures »
Macédoine : gouvernement Gruevski, le début de la fin ?
Macédoine : la manifestation vire aux affrontements dans le centre de Skopje
Macédoine : un sit-in contre les violences policières
Macédoine : les étudiants en grève font plier le gouvernement
Macédoine : opération Kumanovo, nom de code « La petite guerre »

/ Courrier des Balkans, Dérive autoritaire Macédoine, Macédoine, Politique intérieure

La passe de salvador entre Niger et Libye

(B2) Un violent accrochage a eu lieu au sud de la passe de Salvador, jeudi (14 mai), près de la frontière libyenne, entre les forces françaises et nigériennes d’un côté et six individus lourdement armés à bord de deux pick-up, vient d’annoncer le ministère français de la défense.

Drogue et armes de guerre

Ce convoi de deux pick-up avait été observé « progressant à vive allure en direction d’un point de contrôle tenu par les éléments de la force Barkhane ». A l’approche du check-point, les occupants des deux pick-up ont « tenté de forcer le passage, répondant aux sommations par une ouverture brutale du feu ». Trois occupants du convoi ont été tués et 3 autres faits prisonniers, « remis aux forces armées nigériennes ». La fouille des véhicules a permis la saisie de « 1,5 tonnes de drogue, d’armes de guerre (fusils mitrailleurs de type PKM et Kalachnikov), ainsi que de moyens de communication ».

L’opération Kounama 3

La force Barkhane a déclenché le 9 mai dernier, aux côtés des forces nigériennes, une opération de contrôle de zone dans la région de la passe de Salvador située à une centaine de kilomètres au nord-ouest de Manama, visant à déceler les éventuelles infiltrations dans cette importante zone de transit entre la Libye et le nord du Sahel. Cette opération, dénommée « Kounama 3″, a début dans la nuit du 9 au 10 mai par le parachutage d’une centaine d’hommes du 2e régiment étranger de parachutistes (2e REP). Opération qui privilégiait la surprise.

Les forces déployées au sol ont été ensuite rejointes par une colonne de véhicules français et nigériens partis de Madama. Au total, 200 militaires ont été engagés dans cette opération de contrôle de zone : 150 soldats de la forces Barkhane (parachutistes du 2e REP et du 1er régiment de hussards parachutistes) et 50 soldats des forces armées nigériennes (FAN).

(NGV)