Warrior is a powerful, rugged multi-mission robot, built to carry loads greater than 150 lbs (68 kg), travel at a ground speed of 12 mph (19 km/h), through rough terrain and climb stairs with heavy loads. Warrior is currently in development and expected to become available by 2008. The Warrior will have a curb weight of 250 lbs (113 kg), and a gross vehicle weight (maximum payload) of over 400 lbs (181.5 kg). platform can be configured for various missions, including recce, battlefield casualty extraction, as well as a weaponized platform. The U.S. government’s Technical Support Working Group (TSWG) is funding the program development.
Vortex Ring Gun
The method of operation of this weapon is by discharging a blank cartridge into a diverging nozzle, the pressure accelerates a gas cylinder at high mach number and atmospheric pressure into a stationary gas. An incapacitating agent is injected into the supersonic jet stream and spin within the vortex mixes and activates the agent in flight. On impact the agent is deposited onto a target. The effect can be synchronized to resonate with body organs, to magnify the force felt by the target.
The weapon has demonstrated its capability to knock-down a 75kg man-sized mannequin from a distance of 10 meters. Military application of a Vortex Ring Gun system will operate at combat ranges beyond 20 meters. Candidate platform for the Vortex Ring Gun is GL-6 repeating revolver 40-mm grenade launcher. The concept is to provide a two piece kit that retrofits to the gun and enables quick conversion between lethal and non- lethal modes of operation.
The kit consists of a set of blank cartridges and a disposable rod which slides into the barrel and affixes to the muzzle. A second candidate platform for modification to non-lethal operations using vortex technology is the MK19-3 automatic 40-mm grenade launcher. Firing in resonance with body parts (10 shots/sec) amplifies the force felt by a target.
GM-94 / VGM-93 Thermobaric 43mm Grenade
KBP displayed at Defendory 06 an interesting range of 43mm rifle launched grenades, one of the most innovative was the GM 94, capable of firing thermobaric VGM-93 grenades, which can be used inside confined areas. The grenade is loaded with 160 grams of thermobaric mixture, creating a devastating lethal effect at a radius of 3 meters, but maintain a safety zone for the user, at a distance of only ten meters from the explosion center. The VGM-93 43 mm grenade is designed for the GM-94 magazine loasded grenade rifle. This weapon is designed as a support weapon. It can be loaded with four grenades, three in the magazine and one in the chamber. Weight is 4.8 kg, and the length, with butt folded, only 540mm. In addition to the unique thermobaric munition, GM-94 also fires high explosive fragmentation, smoke, and non-lethal munitions. The weapon is equipped with a mechanical sight, effective to 300 meters.
NIE 07: Has Bush “Lost the Nuclear Battle” to Ahmadinejad?
By all means it’s all over bar the shouting and latest US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) 2007 will have given Washington a painful shot in the leg, a remarkable achievement, which has doubtlessly caused the Tehran Mullahs a hearty Persian laugh! An exultant Iranian spokesman, Gholam-Hossein Elham already hastened to claim Tuesday, that US accusations about Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities were “mere lies”, stressing that they should “pay the price” for their baseless accusations.
Vice Admiral John Michael McConnell has become director of national intelligence only last February and is the person within the U.S. administration in charge of the CIA and 15 other intelligence agencies. The shock waves from the US intelligence report, revealing that Iran had put its bid for a nuclear bomb on hold in 2003, in contradiction of its previous 2005 assessment, are already touching other countries and have caused considerable concern among the Israeli defense community.
In fact, the Washington report could not have come at more embarrassing timing indeed. Only two months ago President George W Bush spoke of the Iranian nuclear threat in terms of World War III.
The surprising news which was kept closely secret took even political circles in Washington by storm when it was released by national security adviser Stephen Hadley and a bevy of senior intelligence officials on Monday (December 3, 2007). In the Persian Gulf region itself the news traveled at lightning speed. Only few days after the high-profile Annapolis Theatric show, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was invited for the first time to the Gulf Arab Summit – meeting of six Gulf Cooperation Council leaders which opened in Doha last Monday. His warm welcome by the “moderate” Sunni Arab rulers, including Saudi King Abdullah, clearly indicated total bankruptcy of Bush’s dubious policy, trying to draw a distinction between “radical” and “moderate” Middle East governments.
As for the intelligence assessment itself, it will hardly stand up to serious criticism; however it will undoubtedly have a significant political impact.
Let us examine a few points in some detail:
The document’s eight pages, which include embarrassing instructions on how to differentiate between different assessments, clearly indicates that the Americans have no understanding of what is really happening in Iran’s nuclear program. It seems, based on the somewhat apologetic phrasing of the review, that US Intelligence have no solid information from reliable, high-level agents inserted into the Iranian administration, which leaves this important report with nothing more than a mix of unsubstantiated guesswork. In Rumsfeld’s famous words,” we don’t know what we don’t know”.
That such a report could have been published at this critical timing, only days after the Annapolis summit, must indicate CIA’s anger at the Bush administration over its recent highly embarrassing investigation into CIA sordid performance preceding Operation Iraqi Freedom. It seems that the CIA and the rest of the US intelligence agencies are ready to go to great lengths, that no less than 16 different intelligence agencies, usually at each other’s loggerheads, agree to reveal such a controversial, if not absolutely catastrophic document, just days from the Annapolis summit, in effort to derail any repetition of another Bush initiated military campaign, for which they will be accused for providing insufficient reliable intelligence. Furthermore, the report, already reverberating in the Persian Gulf, is rapidly eroding any attempts by the Bush Administration to encourage the so-called “Moderate Sunnis” into forming an anti-Iranian axis under Washington’s leadership.
In fact the “moderate” Arab front against Iran, so proudly presented by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and prime minister Ehud Olmert, melted away in Doha into nothing within days, by ‘grateful contribution’ of the CIA! If nothing else, the “wizards” of Langley must have gone completely nuts these days.
Of course, the CIA trauma is understandable: Before the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, the fiasco that was revealed recently, by Bob Simon’s 60 Minute show said the United States claim, that Iraq was producing biological weapons were based almost entirely on fabricated accounts from a defector, a student impersonating as “weapons expert”, who was described as crazy by his German intelligence handlers and a congenital liar by his friends.”
But the most astonishing revelation related to the report was a statement issued by one of the intelligence spokesmen during Monday’s press conference. It claimed that for all of the effort spent trying to determine the scope of Iran’s nuclear weapons program, it was a recent media visit to Iran, that “helped” the intelligence community reconsider its assessment of the program.
The Robb-Silberman Commission, which investigated what the Intelligence Community knew about WMD programs around the world, stated in its 2005 report: “Across the board, the Intelligence Community knows disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world’s most dangerous actors. In some cases, it knows less now than it did five or ten years ago”.
No less than four senior intelligence officials spoke at Monday’s briefing, on condition of anonymity, because of the sensitivity of intelligence collection, which differed dramatically from one from 2005. However, the earlier estimate said Iran’s secret nuclear weapons program remained in place. But all four officials said information that has emerged recently indicates the Iranians halted their secret program less than 12 months before the 2005 estimate was prepared. This in itself is remarkable: if indeed the Iranians had actually halted their secret project twelve months BEFORE the 2005 report- then on what intelligence was that report based then?
In a footnote to the “Estimate” quotes: “Iran’s declared civil work related to uranium conversion and enrichment – really doesn’t have anything to do with nuclear weapons”. Such a statement seems highly absurd, when it is well known, that uranium enrichment process is the basic element towards a dual nuclear development-including weapon grade material.
Officially in 2005 the US Intelligence Community (IC) was convinced that Iran was determined to build a nuclear weapon and now it is not sure at all. This indicates a profound change in opinion and, at a minimum, does not inspire confidence that the IC can get this story right this time. After all, if the IC’s judgments can change so drastically in two years time, why should one believe any of its pronouncements one way or the other?
It must be said, however critical one regards the report, that there is some reason in the assessment, that Iran has actually halted its covert activities in 2003. An Israeli analyst said that when in March 2003 the USA invaded Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, winning its powerful lightning campaign, the Iranian clerical establishment was severely shocked by the American unexpected move. This, and not the international pressure which, back then was aimed primarily at Iraq, could have intimidated the previous Iranian leadership to halt their nuclear program, in anticipation to military developments inside Iraq. But when they realized that Washington was inundated in endless bloodletting (supported and encouraged by Tehran), Ahmadinejad, once elected president, decided to go ahead with a top secret program, starting with an ambitious uranium enrichment process at Natanz, which was later exposed by an Iranian opposition group report. Some analysts even predict that, as in the still enigmatic Syrian – North Korean case, Iranian elements might be working in clandestine, virtually behind the backs of the Ayatollahs. (It is known, that some of the clerics still adhere to Khoumeini’s legacy not to enter into nuclear weapons as it contradicts Islamic faith scriptures). However, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who considers himself “messenger” of the 12th Imam, firmly believes that Armageddon (known in Islam as Al-Malhamah Al-Kubrah) is the answer to his ultimate return to save Islam from the infidels.
Iran and its radical Islamic fundamentalist regime, is a devious enemy, determined in their pursuit of any goal aimed to enhance their regional, if not global strategy. Why then would the Iranians abandon a highly prestigious program that had been in the works ever since the late 1980s and which, its leaders repeatedly call top national priority?
Why then would anyone take the present document seriously, when in his right mind to believe, that the Shi’ite mullahs are rational, when they officially maintain an unprecedented radical attitude towards the destruction of Israel and hurt the United States of America, wherever they can?
As the matter stands, its would seem reasonable, that Tehran has decided it has nothing more to fear from the US and so why bother with further engagement over its nuclear program? Indeed, Deputy Foreign Minister Saeed Jalili, the dour official who took over negotiations from the urbane Ali Larijani, did not mince his words with EU representative Javier Solana recently. Jahili was quoted as saying: “There is no longer an Iranian nuclear problem”.
Heron TP (Eitan)
Weighing over four tons, Heron TP – also dubbed Heron 2 or “Eitan”, by its Israeli Air Force (IAF) designation – is designed to fly at high altitude on missions spanning over several days. Israel was seeking a MALE UAV capability for many years, in fact, the first application of an armed MALE UAV was considered in the mid 1990s, as an alternative for the Arrow ballistic missile defense system, also developed by IAI. Eitan, derived from the `heron TP platform, was developed under an Israel Ministry Of Defence (IMOD) program.
Apart from long range, long endurance Intelligence, Surveillance and Target Acquisition Reconnaissance (ISTAR) missions, Eitan is designed to execute a large variety of operational missions, including aerial refueling and strategic missile defense. Eitan made its maiden flight Friday, July 15, 2006 in Israel. The new MALE UAV will provide the Israel Air Force persistent, high altitude, long endurance ISR capability well beyond the reach of enemy air defenses, far beyond the Israeli borders. While the program is unveiled in June 2007, Heron TP has already matured and, according to IAI, it is ready for serial production. Designed as a Multi-payload, Multi-mission platform to answer the requirements of the Israel Air Force, the HERON TP is powered by a single 1,200HP Pratt & Whitney Canada PT6A Turbo-Prop engine, powering a four blade propeller. The use of such powerful turbo-prop engine enables the aircraft to climb and operate at altitude above 40,000 ft avoiding any airspace conflict with commercial aircraft traffic. Using on board fuel and power resources, Heron TP is able to sustain continuous missions for over 36 hours with full mission payload. The aircraft is also equipped with deicing systems protecting the aircraft when flying through icing conditions.
Update – 21/02/2010: Israel’s Air Force has formally accepted the Eitan ( Heron TP) UAV
Creating Virtual Worlds with TerraTools
TerraTools rapidly constructs simulation databases, using standard mapping and aerial imagery (DoD/NGA/USGS) source data, custom Computer Aided Design (CAD) and Geographic Information System (GIS) data, and imagery, in a standard Windows environment. The system follows an automatic, parametric generation of complex visual geometry critical for MOUT. The objects exported by the system can be embedded into the supported simulation tools to create 3D images.
At I/ITSEC 2007 TerraSim demonstrated the system’s capability to automatically create building interiors, and support OneSAF Terrain Format (OTF) database, integration with other presentation editing tools and the ability to publish simulations on the internet. TerraTools 3.5 Core has been extended to support advanced urban generation and now fully integrated with the “Urban Details” software package. The package assist the designer in the creation of a realistic urban model, supporting placement, density, model vanishing ranges, and levels of detail. Users can design objects based on the standard TerraTools model library or use their own models to match regional or cultural specific design.
In addition to automatic model placement and alignment using geometric constraints, model groups can be constructed and scripted to avoid simple repetition. Starting with a basic set of building footprints and road centerlines, TerraTools automatically calculates model positions. Using TerraSim’s integrated triangulated irregular network (ITIN) technology, surface features such as sewer grates and pavement anomalies can be directly integrated into existing curbs and sidewalks. Because TerraTools maintains full feature topology in the source data, light poles, power lines, fire hydrants, and parking meters can be automatically placed and displaced relative to other urban features. Collision detection is automatically performed so that urban details models will not overlap or be placed unnaturally close to one another. Model generation placement points and orientations can be exported as source data for correlation with computer generated forces (CGF) databases.
FINDER – Autonomous, Expendable UAV / SAIC
Finder is a low cost, (retrievable or, optionally, expendable) autonomously navigated UAV developed under a Defense Threat Reduction Agency and Naval Research Laboratory (NRL) initiative. Finder uses waypoint navigation to perform reconnaissance and surveillance missions. For autonomous navigation, waypoints can be updated during the flight, responding to changing user requirements and interest. It can be launched from a runway, catapult or by air insertion from another aerial vehicle such as the MQ-1 Predator. Finder will be able to enhance the mission flexibility and effectiveness of the Predator UAVs, by pursuing low level missions into high threat area. At a total weight of 60 lbs (27.2kg) pounds, Finder can carry a payload of 11 lbs (5 kg), has 100 watts of available power, and endurance of seven hours.
The system is currently being evaluated as an optionally expendable mini-UAV enhancing the effectiveness and flexibility of the Predator MQ-1 unmanned systems. An MQ-1 Predator can carry a mixed payload of one Hellfire and one FINDER, or two FINDERS. The new Warrior will be able to carry mixed payloads of four items while the MQ-9 Reaper is able to carry multiple stores of FINDERs and weapons.
Finder is also planned for deployment from AC-130 Spectre gunships and other Special-Operations platforms. Finder could be equipped with various mission payloads including chemical sensor/sample collector and meteorological sensor payload for post strike chemical bomb damage assessment, or a high resolution, low-level electro-optical still imager. Using piston engine, FINDER is capable of flying missions up to 7 hours. The platform is capable of carrying 11 lbs of payload and has available power of up to 100 watts. To better adapt for combat environment, FINDER is undergoing testing with an electric propulsion and noise abatement modifications. Sofar, electrical propulsion systems and batteries did not meet the required endurance specifications.
FINDER is designed to fly autonomously through predesigned waypoints or controlled in real-time via line-of-sight datalink using standard FalconView interface. It can also be controlled beyond line of sight, using the Predator’s satellite datalink. In operational tests FINDER navigated autonomously and executed dynamic retasking performed via the Predator GCS.
As the system integrator for the Finder UAV, SAIC is upgrading the Predator Ground Control Station to display FINDER data in near-real-time. The system was tested with full-motion IR video sensor, providing medium to low altitude recce, surveillance and target acquisition for ground users. A new high resolution EO payload is under development by Goodrich. An imagery data synchronizer is also developed, to insert the Finder’s digital imagery data into the Predator digital communications datalink.
Is Washington Losing the Gulf to Moscow?
With only hours to spare, the US organizers of the Middle East conference opening in Annapolis last Tuesday decided to make the best of a forlorn event by switching its key motive, from the intractable Israeli-Palestinian dispute to Iran – and its multiple threats to the Middle East. President Bush and Secretary Rice hoped to form a united Arab front against Ahmadinejad’s Iran. But as it soon turned out, this endeavor will be a daunting task in view of at least two obstacles: King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia no longer seems to recognize the US as the single dominant political and military force in the Persian Gulf; and Syrian participation – albeit at the low level of deputy foreign minister, was hardly a convincing indication, that Damascus was considering a drastic change from its strategic link with Tehran. The first alarm bell announcing that not much has changed sounded only hours after the distinguished Annapolis guests left for their capitals with grave doubts over its sobering outcome.
In Annapolis, while Bush, Abbas and Olmert were still basking in the sunlight of illusory expectations, Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal and Syrian deputy foreign minister Faisal Mekdad were quietly finalizing a deal over Lebanon – kept secret from the US President, who was fully engaged with the Israeli-Palestinians peace process. Bush and Rice, by inviting Syria to the Annapolis, indeed exceptional, over Washington’s persistent refusals, had intended to buy Damascus off from installing another pro-Syrian puppet candidate into Beirut’s Ba’abda presidential palace. Unfortunately, the Syrian-Saudi secret tête-à-tête move, quite a surprising move by two lesser friendly nations, based on Syria’s staunch adherence to Saudi’s Sunni rival in Tehran, resulted in getting the 59 year General Michel Suleiman elected as the next Lebanese president. The general, known as pro-Syrian was ‘catapulted’ into commanding the Lebanese Army in 1999, when Lebanon was still very much ‘owned’ by Damascus. After all that Washington and had Paris invested in preventing such a dangerous move in Beirut, Suleiman’s election, if it goes ahead by next week, will be a visible slap in the face of President Bush’s losing his grip on the real makings in the Middle East and not the make-believe ‘dreamworld’ of a Olmert-Abbas peace deal, which will never really work out.
But that is not all: On December 3, only five days after the Annapolis conference, five Persian Gulf oil states were scheduled to meet discussing critical points in their common relations with Washington. One is whether to continue to keep oil prices linked to the fast-sinking US dollar or adopt a currency basket.
Such talk in the Persian Gulf must indicate clear signs of waning American influence in this strategic Gulf region. In fact, painfully aware of this trend, President Bush had already decided to take advantage of the broad Arab presence at Annapolis to initiate attempt in turning the tide and cut US losses against Iran influence in the region. But, having almost criminally ignored Russia’s intentions in that very region, matters could be sliding too fast for a radical remedy, depending last minute energic steps to be taken, without delay by Washington. Here are a few examples of Moscow’s latest activities in the strategic Persian Gulf region.
An important event, which was surprisingly ignored by the media, happened in Moscow just shortly before the Annapolis fiasco. Saudi Crown Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, Deputy Premier, Minister of Defense and Aviation and Inspector General, paid a three-day official visit to Federal Republic of Russia. Prince Sultan held talks with President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin. Both emphasized the importance of strengthening Saudi-Russian relations in all areas and enhancing coordination to protect mutual interests. The Sultan highlighted the distinguished relations between the two countries. He also commended Russia’s positive stance toward regional and international issues. According to diplomatic sources in Riyadh, the two countries were to reach a “framework agreement for military cooperation” that would open the way for Saudi Arabia to buy Russian arms. Following high-level meetings in Moscow, a large arms transaction with Russia should tightened bilateral relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia. The Sultan’s statements during the visit were a quite spectacular. For the first time, a senior Saudi official called for cooperation between Riyadh and Moscow to halt, what he called the “crazy, illogical and disproportionate” slaughter in Iraq. No one could be happier over such words from a high profile Arab visitor, than Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin. Indeed, as unbelievably as it may sound to American ears, at the time already fully engaged in welcoming Abdulaziz’s collegue, Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal in Annapolis, these were the strongest words condemning US actions in the Middle East since King Abdullah referred to America’s “occupation” of Iraq at the Riyadh conference of March 2007.
Last February, President of Russia Vladimir Putin paid his historic visit to Saudi Arabia, the first trip by a Russian leader to the Sunni Arab kingdom, to discuss energy projects and the situation in the Middle East. Speaking after Putin’s visit to Riyadh, Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal said that the Kingdom was in talks with Russia over the possible purchase of Russian weapons. Surprisingly, the final communiqué issued after Sultan’s visit did not mention anything about an arms deal. However an official source, who requested anonymity, said Sultan’s talks with Putin would lead to an understanding on the sale of about 150 Russian T-90 battle tanks to the Kingdom. The source said tests were carried out on the T-90 in Saudi Arabia last year to determine the tank’s suitability for harsh desert conditions, and Russia is also looking to sell Mi-17 helicopters. It is well known, that Saudi Arabia has been a traditional buyer of US and other western military equipment but has recently signaled that it may be considering diversifying its arsenal.
Whether by coincidence, or strategic planning, Washington retaliated quickly last July, proposing a mammoth arms sale package to the Persian Gulf states and primarily Saudi Arabia. Surpassing some 20 billion US dollars in value, the proposed package could include satellite-guided bombs, upgrades to first-line fighter aircraft and new naval vessels. But, as usual, under the already prevailing pre-election environment Washington administration officials remained concerned that the size of the package and the advanced weaponry it contains, as well as broader concerns about Saudi Arabia’s role in Iraq, could prompt Saudi critics in Congress to oppose the package when Congress is formally notified about the deal. Such quite natural democratic hesitations could well pave the way for Moscow’s arms deal.
Russian Strategic Ambitions in the Persian Gulf
Several factors account for a recent growth in Russia’s assertive policy in the Persian Gulf. One has to do with Moscow’s and primarily President Putin’s reestablishment of Russia as a great power. Another issue directly affects Russian stability and security; the Arab Middle East which is closely linked with ex-Soviet Muslim nations in central Asia and the Caucasus. Nevertheless, it seems clearly, that Putin’s overall strategic aim is to challenge the predominant U.S. security position in the Gulf, which in the pre-Iraq occupation fiasco era, was totally unthinkable.
But there were already first signs of change in Moscow’s feelers to this region, when following Operation Desert Storm, then Russian Prime Minister Chernomyrdin toured Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Oman in November 1994. Being the first visit by a Russian prime minister to an Arab state Moscow it already had far- sighted goals. It was an invitation to long-term cooperation and to positions more appreciative of the Russian market and its export capabilities. Nevertheless, the time was not right and not much was achieved until Putin’s muscle-flexing speech at the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy on February 2007. Normally any speech by a Russian high-profile personality is listened to very carefully, by Western politicians and Putin’s out-right challenge was no exception. The carefully phrased rhetoric did not break new ground; indeed, it only repeated things that the Russians have been saying for quite a while. But the venue in which it was delivered, the timing and the confidence with which it was asserted, signified Moscow’s new strategic direction. While the Cold War had not returned, Russia now officially asserted itself as a great power, and started behaving accordingly. The Russians are arguing that the uni-polar world is becoming unacceptable and President Putin now clearly intends to escalate the confrontations with the United States along key focal points, mainly in the strategic Middle East, which has for decades been under Washington’s full patronage. Putin believes that, due to America’s involvement in the deep Iraq insurgency quagmire, the time is right to challenge the Middle East Muslim arena, which is the pressure point to which the United States is most sensitive.
The primary goal, though not the only one, are Russian energy interests in Middle East. Russia is not only a major exporter of energy supplies, it is currently the world’s top oil producer. The Russians have a need to maintain robust energy prices, and working with the Iranians and Saudis in some way to achieve would be directly in line with Moscow’s interest. Putin knows perfectly well how vitally important a geo-strategic commodity energy is. Energy supply issues have become a primordial part of international economic policy today. Not surprisingly then, Putin selected Russia’s extensive oil and gas resources and pipelines, as well as national champion companies, as the key policy instruments in playing a ruthless chess game in world energy geopolitics. And the figures are impressive. As far as natural resources are concerned, Russia’s position is extremely strong: holding 6.6 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves and 26 percent of the world’s gas reserves, it currently accounts for 12 percent of world oil and 21 of recent world gas production. According to 2007, statistics, Russia was the world’s largest oil and gas producer. Under these conditions, it would seem only natural that with energy demand constantly on the rise, Russia wants to use its position as a major energy producer of both oil and gas in order to regain geopolitical significance. And gaining a strong foothold in Middle-East politics, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, could well become a prime objectives for Moscow’s new global ambitions.
Moscow clearly realizes that the two main Islamic powers between the Levant and the Hindu-Kush are Saudi Arabia and Iran. The Russians have things they very would much like from each of these, but Saudis and Iranians have different strategic and religious interests at stake. Saudi Arabia — an Arab and predominantly Sunni kingdom — is very rich but militarily relatively weak. Iran — the largest Persian Shiite power — is not nearly as rich as Saudi Arabia but militarily very powerful, with nuclear ambitions making it a strategic contender for Gulf domination. Moreover, there exists a tremendous geopolitical asymmetry between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Riyadh’s Saudi princes are extremely concerned with Tehran’s Shi’ite clerics’ strategic ambitions would very much like to limit these into acceptable proportions. For this aim, the Saudis however need foreign power assistance- primarily American, at least sofar. This creates internal unrest which places the Saudi Royalty in severe dilemma. Dependence on US military power to keep Iran within bounds, conflicts with internal interest to deny, or at least, limit foreign military presence in the country. The other dilemma which can also affect Russian interests is the oil price. Encouraging high oil price tags, may be of local interest to fill the already packed Saudi coffers, but at the same time strengthen Iran, while efforts to lower these, could affect Russian aspirations, oil being Moscow’s major financial income asset.
But Russia also has dilemmas, when dealing in Middle-Eastern politics. Russia does not wish to see the Islamic fundamentalist clerics in Tehran becoming a dominant strategic power in the oil-rich Persian Gulf region. In this they might even share Washington’s strategic interests. But the Russians do want to use Iran, within certain manageable proportions, which makes Moscow’s own position an extremely complex one. As the old saying goes: “the Middle East is a graveyard of ambitions”.
One highly controversial aspect of Russian’s Persian Gulf involvement concerns helping Riyadh and other Middle-East nations with nuclear power development was discussed during the meeting. All major regional players in the Middle East appear eager to gain nuclear energy capabilities, probably to counter Iran’s nuclear ambitions. For example, Putin, in a recent trip to Egypt, offered Russian nuclear knowledge to Cairo. Putin’s latest activism in the nuclear diplomatic power game within the Middle East is not only highly dangerous, but must be extremely challenging to Israel and the United States of America. On the one hand, it is Moscow’s ideal instrument for gaining influence over the regional dynamics; this is in fact the Russian strategy toward Iran. It is possible that Moscow does not really want a nuclear Iran close to it’s border region and because relations between the two countries are complex and often disturbed by diverging interests, especially in the Caspian sea, they are approaching this issue with extreme caution. Therefore, Russian support for Iran on the nuclear issue is instrumental, actually representing a rather shrewd approach, trying at the same time to limit Iran’s strategic independence.
Despite all recent endeavors by Moscow to assert its strategic presence in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East as such, the undeniable fact remains, at least for the foreseeable future, that the United States is still the prominent power in the region. It will be extremely difficult for Moscow to replace Washington’s role as the main ally of major Middle East nations. Although Moscow is attempting such a move, it seems realistic, that as long as the United States remains the hegemonic power in the region, maintaining its overwhelming military presence in the Gulf, it will be extremely difficult to implement its aspirations.
ShieldAll Armor
ShieldAll armor system, developed by Battelle and produced by PVI is an advanced material system using customized composites and materials including metals, ceramics, reinforcing and patented binders. The armor can be tailored to meet specific threats and is designed as modular system, for ease of installation, repair, replacement, and modification. In a relatively lightweight and compact application this armor offers effective protection against a wide range of threats while being 1/3 lighter than steel armor. This armor provides EFP protection which standard steel armor does not offer. The new armor recently completed a series of testing where it demonstrated its resilience against IED effects.
At less than 37 percent the weight of steel armor, the Battelle material alone is capable of stopping multiple armor piercing projectiles exceeding a 7.62mm threat as a stand-alone component. When combined with Protected Vehicles, Inc. armoring methodologies, the complete system is capable of stopping threats from 50-caliber armor-piercing shells without the weight associated with conventional metal or ceramic armor.
Based on advanced materials development program at Battelle, PVI and Battelle joined forces to create a composite armor encompassing ceramics, metals, reinforcing and patented binders that provide exceptional protection against threats from powerful EFP explosions.
One of the elements composing the new ShieldAll is Battelle’s FlexAll™ hyperplastic material which can absorb high energy impacts without permanent deformation. A FlexAll module will crumple on impact to absorb an incoming force but return to its original shape within minutes. During a series of tests, race cars were driven into honeycomb-like columns mad of FlexAll material, at speeds up to 60 mph. The energy-absorbing structure behaved identically crash after crash, absorbing 92 percent of an impact’s energy each time.
According to PVI, this new armor solution is based on readily available components and ongoing involvement from a tier one polymer manufacturer. ShieldAll™ is available immediately for large-scale production ramp up.
Although originally developed for use on PVI’s Golan, Alpha and Protector line of vehicles, ShieldAll utilizes a versatile design which allows it to be used as an up-armor kit on an assortment of other combat vehicles currently being developed and already in the operating theater.
In addition, Battelle considered personal armor applications for the new material, giving soldiers in the field more mobility while allowing equal or better protection to current body armor.
Commander’s Digital Assistant (CDA)
CDA is an application built for militarized personal digital assistant (PDA), which provides situational awareness and mission planning capabilities for field commanders. The pocket PC application runs on a militarized version of an IPAQ, and is intended for the battalion commander and staff, company commanders and platoon leaders. CDA provides dismounted troops the same functionality of the US Army Battle Command, Brigade-and-Below (FBCB2) command and control system, which was sofar available only at stationary command posts or command vehicles. FBCB2 is the principal element in the “Blue Force Tracking” situational awareness system, and this is where CDA becomes a key element, as it integrates dismounted elements into the complete situational picture.
In 2003 and early 2004, the U.S. Army initially deployed few systems for operational field testing. In 2004 and more significantly 2005, hundreds more CDAs (2005 models) will be deployed in support of dismounted troops in Iraq. The new model CDAs are based on the initial positive experience gained with earlier models. Due to the fast evolution of commercial PC and PDA technology, the Army is planning to deploy new versions of the system every year. The current version uses satellite phone capability and is able to download maps with overlaid graphics. For extended communications, the CDA is connected to a SINCGARS ASIP radio. Other radios may be incorporated in the future, such as the MBITR, the PRC-117F or L-band and Iridium satellite systems. The CDA is designed form automatic communication with other CDAs or supported communications devices, in a peer-to-peer formation. It can also operate in a network when required. Other communications features support “Blue Force Tracking” facility to support situational awareness of all friendly troops.
In 2006, a new version of Commander’s Digital Assistant (CDA) was introduced by General Dynamics’ for the Land Warrior program. The system is currently available as Version 5, offering a larger color touch screen, hard disk, integral GPS and built-in satellite voice communications, offering the capability to exchange voice messaging with other CDAs. The system uses U.S. Army Standard Battle Command software to provide dismounted leaders with situational awareness picture, derived by FBCB2. The system also maintains constant position reporting for non-line-of-sight blue force tracking.
The system enables battalion commanders to pass orders within their staff and migrate orders to company and platoon leaders. When deployed with dismounted teams, CDA is providing access to sensors, intelligence and tactical data not available in the past at such tactical levels. This capability is essential in low intensity warfare scenarios, where small forces must contain and manage situations before they escalate into crisis. Situational and intelligence displays also compute the center of mass for a particular units by the aggregation of its individual soldier’s positions, reported by GPS. For reporting, the system is equipped with joint variable message format (JVMF) database into the CDA system for open communications with other units, services and coalition forces.
At AUSA 2007 Raytheon unveiled some details about its Commander’s Digital Assistant (CDA). A product originally introduced as a ‘spin off’ from FCS has now evolved separately from the program. Raytheon is working on a new version of the Commander’s Digital Assistant (CDA). The new device establishes the smallest, lightest package currently available for dismounted ‘blue force tracking’ applications. The new device weighs 4.5 – 5.6 pounds (depending on configuration) using an internal, rechargeable 10.8 VDC Lithium-ion battery pack sustaining five hours of operation. CDA also offers improved commonality with the Army’s Air Warrior Electronic Data Manager.
Further improving its application for aviators and ground troops, the new CDA is designed to be sunlight readable and compatible with night vision devices (ANVIS/NVG). CDA communicates with existing networks such as the FBCB2 or Interactive Situational Awareness System (ISAS), using an integral satellite communications L band transceiver and GPS receiver set with anti-spoofing capability (SAASM). Both antennae are combined into a single, external device. It will also interface smoothly with most tactical radios. Raytheon designed the CDA to integrate with its Microlight radio currently configured for the Enhanced Position Location Reporting System (EPLRS) waveform and tied into the tactical internet, carrying standard Joint Variable Message Format (JVNF) digital messages to users across the network. The system also supports Voice over IP communications. The CDA uses removable hard drive to ease data transfer and management of classified information. It runs on Linux RedHat or Windows 2000/XP operating systems.
Post Annapolis: Hamas Targets Abu Mazen’s West Bank And challenges Israel
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in Sharm e-Sheikh last Tuesday that one cannot talk about possible failure at Annapolis because its existence is itself an achievement. Indeed, the Arab foreign ministers meeting in Cairo Friday which agreed to send ministers to Annapolis on behalf of the League’s Follow-Up Committee, is in itself an unprecedented gesture. But expectations should be kept within realistic bounds: Saudi foreign minister Saud al Faisal said: “We are not going for handshakes or a display of emotions… We are there only to reach a peace which safeguards Arab interests and safeguards the Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese lands. Put in clear: at best it would signal a more-of-the-same attitude towards Israel-or better phrased- let us see what Olmert is willing, or able to deliver. The sober fact is that neither Olmert nor Abu Mazen can deliver ANYTHING – based on their own political dilemma, which exists on either side. Moreover, all three (including President Bush) are already widely regarded as “wingless lame ducks” in their own entourage.
Based on such unfortunate facts, obviously, the fatuous Annapolis “peace process” will fall apart, as it did before in similar, alas, countless events, since it was never bound to achieve anything anyway. This is what usually happens when delusional ideas confront reality.
But, delusional thinking is very tenacious – politicians with no valid ideas are loath to abandon even some of the most ridiculous policies, since, having invested so much political capital in its futile effort- they are adamant that something must come out of this. Unfortunately, Annapolis is already on the path to follow this same fiasco again.
But there may be more to Annapolis, than meets the eye: President George W. Bush needs more from the long-awaited and oft-discussed event than just launching rather hopeless negotiations. He needs this conference to show the Arab world that progress is actually being made on the Israeli-Palestinian track, so that the Arab countries at the summit will coalesce and deal with other, much more pressing problems in the region: Iran, for instance, and the spread of Shi’ite extremism and Ahmadinejad’s ambitious Shi’ite Crescent to conquer the Sunni Arab Middle East. Bush’s game plan is that signaling real progress will, at last, cement together a coalition of “moderate” Muslim states and harness them behind US backing sanctions against Iran. The Israel-Palestinian issue is just a marginal bi-product, so it seems.
Israeli analysts believe that this trend could solidify, if the Arab delegation will include senior participants. It may well be the start in creating an impressive Sunni Arab opposition axis led by the US and Western alliance against Shi’ite Iran. If Syria should be included, this could be the first significant set-back for Ahmadinejad’s Shi’ite crescent. But this would inevitably force him to act in order to derail this process before it is too late.
In fact, the entire Annapolis meeting could have been a rather clever move by President Bush and Condoleezza Rice ( a last minute effort to save the administration dilemma in Iraq’s future) to initiate a political comeback into Mid Eastern affairs, after the Iraq fiasco and the bungling democratization process in Egypt and Palestine. If indeed this is the case, then Olmert and Abu Mazen, would have been only pawns in this ruthless game political chess- the outcome of which is not clear- as we wait for Tehran for its next challenge in Lebanon and Palestine in order to derail this entire process. Indeed, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad being a very shrewd operator, his reaction could no doubt prove surprising and very deadly
Over the last two months various Palestinian spokesmen have warned that failure at Annapolis would lead to yet another round of violence, perhaps a third intifada. Israeli officials, including Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gadi Ashkenazi, however, are skeptical, saying that the Palestinians have been badly weakened by the last seven years, are suffering from deep division and could not wage another terrorist war right now, even if they wanted to. But the Palestinians are not the only players in this game. In fact, as matters stand- Iran and Syria are the established sponsors of Palestinian violence and will no doubt remain at the hub of such future events.
Iran has two established aces in its hand to play this game: Hamas and Hezbollah. Both of these may becoming more and more isolated, but remain still highly dangerous operators. Hezbollah is holding a trump card in the Lebanese elections- which have already entered into a dangerous cliffhanger situation on Friday Midnight. Barring a miracle, which seldom happens in this unpredictable region, Lebanon could well be on its way into a catastrophic abyss. A civil war in Lebanon, could derail not only any US-backed Sunni effort, but actually chase out the European 1701 UNIFIL contingent, as it did in 1983. Moreover, with the Lebanese national army disintegrating into rival factions again, Hezbollah would regain the Israel border region to restart conflagration, on Tehran’s time and will.
To Israel’s south – Hamas is already on its way to create a substantial military force, ready and highly motivated to confront any IDF incursion into the well prepared Gaza Strip defense. Based on experiences gained from last year’s Lebanon war, with able assistance from Iranian and Hezbollah experts, Hamas will offer a bloody fight to the Israeli army. Moreover, whatever the outcome of the Annapolis meeting, analysts are convinced that Abu Mazen’s inability to implement any concessions to the Israelis, will recreate the deadlock further aggravating discontent in the West Bank, which will only bolster Hamas’ influence and power base there. The inevitable result would be that Hamas will eventually exploit PLO weakness and take over the West Bank in the same manner in which it defeated 60,000 Fatah activists and security forces in last June’s shocking Gaza fiasco.
Sofar, what prevented this from happening is the presence of the IDF in most of the Palestinian townships, which otherwise would long have joined Hamas. Israeli defense analysts have already warned of allowing any concessions that PM Olmert has in mind, for example, handing over security to Abu Mazen’s security forces in dangerous West Bank focal towns. First such concessions, allowing Fatah police into Nablus have already demonstrated their inability to restore even public order against the local warlord domination. Olmert’s latest “gift” of 50 Russian BRDM-2 armored cars with 14,5mm turret mounted heavy machine guns, is another of those futile gestures, which could endanger low flying helicopters supporting counter-terror operations in the West bank Hamas hideouts. In Gaza, Hamas took charge of similar cars, provided with US assistance, but within hours, with nearly a shot fired by Fatah security forces- ten times Hamas strength these became coveted weapons for Hamas. A similar situation could happen in the West Bank- as all these weapons fall into Hamas hands- and then what?
Here then are the seeds in what could become Ahmadinejad’s move to derail the Sunni Arab anti-Shi’ite axis before it matures into shape: Create total chaos in Lebanon, enhancing the Qassam offensive against southern Israel, with longer range rockets- against which the IDF still has no technological answer- with aim to draw Israel into an unwanted and costly ground attack. Challenge Abu Mazen’s frail government- through elections or physical take-over of its territory- at the same time confronting the IDF with new suicide attacks- actually a second front. If Qassam rockets will be fired from vantage positions in close-border villages at lucrative strategic installations and heavily populated urban targets, all coming within range in the heart of Israel, this would become a strategic challenge to the IDF. Furthermore, with Hezbollah again deployed along its northern border, Israel would have to mobilize all its military power to fight off a three-frontal war on its rear. By delivering such a clear message, that a full scale Middle East conflict is in the offing, with unpredictable consequences, would be Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s challenge to Washington’s latest gambit. It is common knowledge that this turbulent region is already filled to the brim with some of the world’s most highly sophisticated and lethal weapons which East and West has created. Is this scenario, actually what President George W Bush warned off, hinting on World War Three?
Update: Nov. 25, 2007:
Syria to attend Annapolis conference
Syria accepted today the US invitation to the peace conference in Annapolis; Heading the Syrian deligation will be the deputy Foreign Minister Fayssal al-Mekdad. According to the Reuters news agency, the Syrian statement did not give Syria’s reasons for attending or say why it will not be sending its foreign ministers like the other Arab participants. At a meeting of Arab foreign ministers in Cairo, Friday (Nov. 23, 2007) , participating Arab countries agreed to attend the peace conference in Annapolis, Maryland. The recent Syrian move could signal Bashar Asad hesitatingly making a first move oward a Sunni axis against Iran’s Shi’ite regional ambitions. Although too early to singnify a definite change of direction towards the US initiative, Damascus could have second thoughts, as to its adherence to the Tehran Shi’ia dictate. It remains to be seen, how Mahmoud Ahmadinejad will react to Damascus’ latest move, which is certainly challenging his strategy towards Syria. Perhaps the tense situation in Beirut, Syria and Iran’s strategic interest sphere, will be next on the top agenda.
New developments there are due by the end of this week.
For further reading we recommend:
Sherpa Parafoil Based Aerial Delivery System
TM/MC, developed and produced by the Canadian company Mist Mobility Integrated Systems Technology, Inc. (MMIST) represents a Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) ‘freefall rig’ designed for super-sized cargo, rather than a human sky diver. The system uses a rectangular, 900-square-foot parachute, which can be steered, like a classic round chute. It also incorporates a small drogue parachute to help stabilize the cargo pallet, keeping it facing upward so the main chute opens properly after freefalling. Sherpa can accommodate rigged weights from 50 to 2,200 pounds (one ton) deployed from an altitude 25,000 ft and offset distance of up to nine miles from the target. Several Sherpas could be dropped during one pass, saving time and fuel, and each could soar to a different unit at a different location stretched over several miles.
While in flight, Sherpa constantly checks its position using a GPS receiver, and makes flight adjustments as necessary, pulling on two steering lines to position the parachute on the correct flight path. Before takeoff the system is programmed with the altitude and speed, the cargo’s weight, drop zone location and wind speeds predicted for the various heights. The system will calculate its flight plan autonomously.
Sherpa can also be programmed to maneuver around known obstacles or enemy locations. The system can operate autonomously or guided by a human operator, from an aircraft, by a parachutist or from the ground. The handheld remote controller provides manual over-ride and adjust the landing point in-flight. The system is compatible with current airdrop platforms such as C-130, C-141, C-17, C-123, C-23, C-160 and is also capable of drops from rotary wing aircraft (i.e. CH-47, CH-53). At a cost of about US$60,000 per unit, Sherpa can be recovered without special tools and be reused within a 45 to 90 minute time frame.
Sherpa is currently operational in Iraq as part of Combat Services Support Delivery, of supplies to soldiers throughout the vast portion of Iraq. It is operated by the U.S. Military, Canadian forces and a number of NATO forces. The Sherpa versions deployed since 2003 with the US Marine Corps in Iraq can carry only 1,200 lbs (545 kg) of cargo. By 2008, the corps expects to get larger versions, capable of supporting 2,200 (1 ton) and 10,000 lbs. (4.5 ton). The US Special Forces Command operates the CQ-10A “Snow Goose” powered paragliders, also developed by MMIST.
Lightweight Machine-Gun – LSAT
Lightweight Small Arms Technology (LSAT) rifle is under development by AAI, as an Army Technology Development initiative since 2004.The new weapon is designed to replace light machine guns, such as M249 and M240. LSAT with 600 rounds of ammunition will weigh 23.8 pounds, representing 38% reduction from the current 38.3 pounds.
It will fire new case telescoped (CT) which promises to save between 35 to 40% of the ammunition weight. Caseless telescoped (CL) ammunition also under development promises to save up to 50% of the ammunition weight along with 40% reduction in volume. He use of High Ignition Temperature Propellant (HITP) allows the complete elimination of the cartridge case. The cartridges will be linked to each other using a flexible full loop polymer links. This system improves feed efficiency and minimizes mechanical jams, resulted from bent or damaged links. The weapon’s design will also have improved reliability; utilizing rotating chamber provides in-line push through feed and ejection.
AAI is leading an industry team including ARES of Port Clinton, Ohio, ATK of Independence, MO, Battelle from Ohio, Omega Training Group of Columbus, Ga and general Dynamics from FL. The prototype development is expected to continue over 24 months. The new weapon is scheduled to complete development by 2010.
Wasp III MAVs for Marine Corps’ Platoons
The US Marine Corps selected the ‘Battlefield Air Targeting Micro Air Vehicle’ (BATMAV) system for its ‘Tier I’ micro UAV requirement. Sofar the corps was using two mini UAVs at the battalion level – the BAI DragonEyes and the Raven from AeroVironment. Both were fielded at the Marine Expeditionary Units (MEU) level. The smaller Wasp III will be deployed at the platoon level. “The small size and light weight of Wasp make it ideally suited for deployment directly to platoons, where flexibility, portability and reliability are critically important.” said U.S. Marine Corps Major James Roudebush, Tier I UAV Program Manager, PMA-263.
“We have been evaluating Wasp for some time, and believe that it offers a unique new capability to support our Marines’ missions around the world.” The Marine Corps will procure the BATMAV systems through the Air Force BATMAV contract, which was awarded to AV in December 2006 and provides a means for other U.S. armed services to procure these systems. The Air Force Special Operations Command plans to use these systems in support of ground combat contriller teams.
This week AeroVironment (NASDAQ: AVAV) announced it was awarded a $19.3 million order for the supply of the miniature drones. Each of the Corps’ BATMAV systems will consists of two Wasp III micro air vehicles (MAV), a hand-held ground control unit, a data-link assembly and a battery charger. Wasp III has a wingspan of 29 inches and weight of one pound. Its payload consists of a static infrared camera, and a pair of color video cameras, one looking forward and the other – sideways. All cameras transmit streaming video directly to the hand-held ground controller for display on an integrated monitor.