| May
16, 2009
Pentagon
Preparing for War with the 'Enemy':
Russia
By
Rick Rozoff
"Today the situation is much more
serious than before August 2008....
[A] possible recurrence of war will not
be limited to the Caucasus.
"The new President of the United
States did not bring about any crucial
changes in relation to Georgia, but
having a dominant role in NATO he
still insists on Georgia's soonest
joining of the Alliance. If it
happens, the world would face a more
serious threat than the crises of the
Cold War.
"Under the new realities, Georgia's
war against South Ossetia may easily
turn into NATO's war against Russia.
This would be a third world war."
On
May 12 James Mattis, NATO's Supreme
Allied Commander Transformation [ACT]
and commander of the U.S. Joint Forces
Command, spoke at a three-day symposium
called Joint Warfighting 09 in Norfolk,
Virginia, where NATO's Allied Command
Transformation is based, and stated: "I
come with a sense of urgency. The enemy
is meeting like this as well." [1]
A local newspaper summarized his speech:
"Mattis outlined a future in which wars
will not have clearly defined beginnings
and ends. What is needed, he said, is a
grand strategy, a political framework
that can guide military planning." [2]
He failed, for what passes for
diplomatic reasons no doubt, to identify
who "the enemy" is, but a series of
recent developments, or rather an
intensification of ongoing ones,
indicate which nation it is.
Last week the head of the U.S. Strategic
Command, Gen. Kevin Chilton, told
reporters during a Defense Writers Group
breakfast on May 7 "that the White House
retains the option to respond with
physical force - potentially even using
nuclear weapons - if a foreign entity
conducts a disabling cyber attack
against U.S. computer networks...."
An account of his talk added "the
general insisted that all strike
options, including nuclear, would remain
available to the commander in chief in
defending the nation from cyber
strikes."
Chilton "said he could not rule out
the possibility of a military salvo
against a nation like China, even though
Beijing has nuclear arms," [3] though
the likely first target of alleged
retaliation against equally alleged
cyber attacks would be another nation
already identified by US military
officials as such: Russia.
In late April and early May of 2007
the government of Estonia, which was
inducted into NATO in 2004 and whose
president was and remains Toomas Hendrik
Ilves, born in Sweden and raised in the
United States (where he worked for Radio
Free Europe), reported attacks on
websites in the country which were
blamed on Russia.
Over two years later no evidence has
been presented to substantiate the claim
that Russian hackers, much less the
government itself, were behind the
attacks, though it remains an article of
faith among US and other Western
officials and media that they were.
The response from American authorities
in the first place was so sudden and
severe, even before investigations were
conducted, as to strongly suggest that
if the attacks hadn't been staged they
would need to be invented.
Right afterward Secretary of the Air
Force Michael W. Wynne stated,
"Russia, our Cold War nemesis, seems to
have been the first to engage in cyber
warfare."
The US Air Force news source from which
the above is quoted added that the
events in Estonia days earlier "did
start a series of debates within NATO
and the EU about the definition of clear
military action and it may be the
first test of the applicability of
Article V of the NATO charter regarding
collective self-defense in the
non-kinetic realm." [4]
NATO's Article 5 is a collective
military defense provision, in fact a
war clause, one which first and to date
for the only time has been used to
support the protracted and escalating
war in Afghanistan.
References to it, then, are not to be
taken lightly.
On a visit to Estonia last
November Pentagon chief Robert Gates met
with the country's prime minister,
Andrus Ansip, and "discussed Russian
behavior and new cooperation on cyber
security...."
It was reported that "Ansip said NATO
will operate under the principle of
Article 5 of the alliance's treaty,
which states that an attack on one ally
is treated as an attack on all," and "We
are convinced that Estonia, as a member
of NATO, will be very well defended."
[5]
That the repeated mention of NATO's
Article 5 continued a year and a half
after the alleged cyber attacks when
none had occurred in the interim is
revealing.
At the beginning of this month the
Pentagon announced that it was launching
what it called a "digital warfare
force for the future," at Fort Meade
in Maryland under the control of the
U.S. Strategic Command, whose chief,
Gen. Kevin Chilton, was quoted earlier
as threatening the use of force up to
and including nuclear weapons.
The initiative was characterized in a
news report as follows:
"Lt. Gen. Keith Alexander, also the
Pentagon's leading cyber warfare
commander, said the U.S. is determined
to lead the global effort to use
computer technology to deter or defeat
enemies...." [6]
The Pentagon is a synecdoche for the
Department of Defense and everything
related to its activities is cloaked in
the same euphemism, so when pressed the
US will insist its new cyber warfare
project is intended for defensive
purposes only. Any nation which and
people who have been on the receiving
end of US Defense Department actions
know better. The new US cyber warfare
command, its rationale based on a
supposed Russian threat emanating from a
non-military incident in the Baltics
over two years ago, will be used to
cripple the computer systems of any
nation targeted for direct military
assault, thus rendering them
defenseless, and will be particularly
effective for space-based and Star Wars
(missile shield, interceptor missiles)
first strike plans.
On the same day the report of General
Alexander's pledge to "defeat enemies"
appeared another news item reported that
"A quasi-classified satellite that will
serve as an engineering trailblazer for
ballistic missile tracking technologies
flew into space Tuesday [May 12]." [7]
It was a Space Tracking and Surveillance
System Advanced Technology Risk
Reduction (STSS-ATRR) satellite, which
"is part of a space-based system for
the Missile Defense Agency.
"Sensors aboard the STSS-ATRR satellite
and on the ground will communicate with
other systems to defend against incoming
ballistic missiles." [8]
A few days earlier the California-based
manufacturer Ducommun in a news report
titled Ducommun Incorporated Announces
Delivery of Nanosatellites to U.S. Army
Space and Missile Defense Command
announced that "its Miltec
Corporation subsidiary delivered
flight-ready nanosatellites to the U.S.
Army pace and Missile Defense
Command/Army Forces Strategic Command (USASMDC/ARSTRAT)
in Huntsville, Alabama on April 28,
2009."
The delivery was "the completion of the
first U.S. Army satellite development
program since the Courier 1B
communications satellite in 1960."[9]
Military satellites used for
neutralizing the potential of a rival
nation not so much to launch a first
strike but to respond to one blur the
distinction between so-called Son of
Star Wars missile shield projects and
full-fledged militarization of space.
A recent Russian commentary saw it in
just that manner:
"Withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty
signified a switch to the testing and
deployment of a global missile defense
system, with a view to fully removing
the deterrent potential of China, and
partially that of Russia.
"Washington [is] still trying to
eliminate international legal
restrictions on the formation of a
system, which would theoretically make
it invulnerable towards an act of
retaliation, and even a
launch-under-attack strike." [10]
Added to which is another
"quasi-classified" subterfuge related to
a prospective resumption of Strategic
Arms Reduction Treaty (START) talks
between the US And Russia.
American Assistant Secretary of State
Rose Gottemoeller stated this week "that
the US is not prepared to cut warheads
removed from delivery means and kept in
storage." [11]
So in addition to US plans to deploy
ground-, sea-, air- and space-based
anti-missile systems primarily around
and against Russia (Poland, the Czech
Republic, Norway, Britain, Japan and
Alaska to date), the Pentagon will hold
in reserve nuclear warheads for
activation without a monitoring
mechanism provided to Russian inspectors
and arms reduction negotiators.
On May 6 Euronews conducted an interview
with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov, who warned, "The way it [the US
anti-ballistic missile shield] is
designed has nothing to do with Iran's
nuclear program. It is aimed at Russian
strategic forces, deployed in the
European part of the Russian
Federation." [12]
To add to the concerns of Russia and
other nations, On April 30 the US
established a Navy Air and Missile
Defense Command (NAMDC) at the Naval
Support Facility at Dahlgren, Virginia.
"NAMDC is the lead organization for
Navy, joint and combined Integrated Air
and Missile Defense (IAMD). NAMDC serves
as the single warfare center of
excellence to synchronize and integrate
Navy efforts across the full spectrum of
air and missile defense to include air
defense, cruise missile defense and
ballistic missile defense." [13]
The past two weeks has been a fertile
period for stories in this vein and, to
bring attention nearer the Earth, the
US-based Strategy Page reported from a
Russian source that "The United
States has bought two Su-27 fighter jets
from Ukraine" to "be used to train
American military pilots, who may face
opponents in them" and that the "US
military will use them to test its radar
and electronic warfare equipment." [14]
This was at the very moment that the US
client in Ukraine, President Viktor
Yushchenko, his national poll
ratings plummeting to near 1%, signed a
directive to prepare for full NATO
membership and a few days after a US
military delegation visited the country
to inspect a tank unit and to plan
"reforming the system of combat
training...." [15]
In terms of US training for warfare
against the Russian Air Force, the
Ukrainian development is only the latest
in a number of such activities.
Immediately following the nation
becoming a full member of NATO, the US
81st Fighter Squadron flew to Constanta,
Romania (in which nation the Pentagon
has acquired four new bases since) to
engage in combat training against
Russian MiG-21s.
According to one US pilot present, "It
was pretty neat - you're sitting in a
MiG-21 that will be airborne with a
MiG-21 pilot within days. This was an
arm of the Soviet Union. These pilots
were flying before the Soviet Union
fell. They have quite a bit of
perspective." [16]
In July of the next year the US 492nd
Fighter Squadron was deployed to the
Graf Ignatievo Air Base in neighboring
Bulgaria to insure the
opportunity for "Air Forces from
multiple nations to learn about each
other's aircraft tactics and
capabilities.
"The pilots of the F-15E Strike Eagles
and the MIG-29s and MIG-21s are sharing
knowledge of aircraft and tactics as the
exercise wraps up its first week of
training."
A US Air Force colonel was quoted as
saying, "Only two of the 38 aircrew
members have had a chance to fly against
MIGs. By the time the exercise is over,
everyone will have had a chance to
either fly in a MIG or fly against one."
[17]
A month afterward the US Air Force 22nd
Expeditionary Fighter Squadron arrived
in Romania for the Viper Lance exercises
which "marked the first time U.S. F-16
pilots have trained in Romania" and
"where "MiG-21 and F-16 pilots [flew]
integrated formations to conduct basic
fighter maneuvers, dissimilar air combat
training and air-to-ground strike
missions...." [18]
This time the quote is from an F-16
Fighting Falcon pilot:
"My flight in the backseat of a Lancer
[MiG-21] is a good opportunity to look
at different aircraft and it's a real
privilege and an honor. I want to see
what they see from their cockpit, and
view a new angle of understanding
against our adversaries." [19]
Two weeks ago a US Air Force fighter
squadron flew to the Bezmer Air Base in
Bulgaria where an American airman said,
"This is the first time a USAFE [United
States Air Forces in Europe] fighter
squadron has deployed to this
location....The most rewarding part
of this experience is knowing that I am
helping the pilots train for war." [20]
To prepare the US for air combat against
the full range of Russian military
aircraft, India was invited to the
annual Red Flag air combat exercises in
Alaska in 2007, war games "meant to
train pilots from the US, NATO and other
allied countries for real combat
situations.
"This includes the use of 'enemy'
hardware and live ammunition for bombing
exercises." [21]
India provided six Sukhoi SU-30MKI
fighters which were "particularly
interesting to the exercise as [they
are] Russian-made, thus traditionally
considered 'hostile.'" [22]
May 1st, on the occasion of the Czech
Republic taking over the six-month NATO
air patrol rotation in the Baltic skies
over Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania -
five minutes flight from Russia's second
largest city of St. Petersburg - a Czech
official boasted "The area we are
protecting is about three times larger
than that of the Czech Republic. This
is a NATO outpost."
Lithuanian Air Force Commander
Arturas Leita announced that "the Baltic
countries would probably ask for the
prolongation of the air force mission
within NATO until 2018." [23]
From June 8-16 Sweden will host a
NATO drill, Loyal Arrow, described as
"biggest air force drill ever in the
Finnish-Swedish Bothnian Bay," [24],
also not far from St. Petersburg, with a
British aircraft carrier and more than
50 fighter jets participating.
That exercise will begin exactly a
week after the US-led NATO Cooperative
Lancer 09 war games end in Georgia on
Russia's southern flank.
In speaking of the dangers of the
last-named but with equal application to
all that has preceded it, the South
Ossetian Ministry for Press and Mass
Media website recently quoted political
scientist Irina Kadzhaev as warning:
"Today the situation is much more
serious than before August 2008. The
then threat endangered only South
Ossetia and Abkhazia, but after Russia's
recognition of these states'
independence and the conclusion of
agreements envisaging the presence of
Russian armed forces on their
territories, a possible recurrence of
war will not be limited to the Caucasus.
"The new President of the United States
did not bring about any crucial changes
in relation to Georgia, but having a
dominant role in NATO he still
insists on Georgia's soonest joining of
the Alliance. If it happens, the world
would face a more serious threat than
the crises of the Cold War.
"Under the new realities, Georgia's
war against South Ossetia may easily
turn into NATO's war against Russia.
This would be a third world war."
[25]
1) Virginian-Pilot, May 13, 2009
2) Ibid
3) Global Security, May 12, 2009
4) Air Force Link, June 1, 2007
5) U.S. Department of Defense, November
12, 2008
6) Associated Press, May 5, 2009
7) Space Flight Now, May 5, 2009
8) Pratt & Whitney, May 5, 2009
9) Ducommun Incorporated, April 29, 2009
10) Russian Information Agency Novosti,
May 7, 2009
11) Russia Today, May 5, 2009
12) Euronews, May 6, 2009
13) Navy News, April 30, 2009
14) Moscow News, May 11, 2009
15) National Radio Company of Ukraine,
April 29, 2009
16) Air Force Link, August 2, 2005
17) U.S. Air Forces in Europe, July 24,
2006
18) Stars and Stripes, August 26, 2006
19) Air Force Link, August 17, 2006
20) Air Force Link, April 28, 2009
21) Indo-Asian News Service, November
26, 2007
22) Avionews (Italy), November 28, 2007
23) Czech News Agency, May 1, 2009
24) Barents Observer, May 7, 2009
25) Ministry for Press and Mass Media of
the Republic of South Ossetia, April 27,
2009
Author's Bio: Rick Rozoff has been
involved in anti-war and
anti-interventionist work in various
capacities for forty years. He lives in
Chicago, Illinois. Is the manager of the
Stop NATO international email list at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato/
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Correction-Pentagon-Prepa-by-Rick-Rozoff-090514-506.html |