Pentagon Exploits Tensions Over Ukraine, Pushes for Multi-Purpose Sensor Chain Across Canada's Arctic

Arrest that Man, He's From Russia!

They sure know how to pick their opportunities.

At the very moment NATO leaders are in Wales fretting over what to do with Vlad Putin and the future of Ukraine, America's brass are floating the idea of establishing a "multi-purpose sensor chain" across the vast Canadian Arctic.

Exactly what they have in mind isn't immediately clear but would entail sensors that could detect and track aircraft, ships and even cruise missiles as well as a missile attack from North Korea.  It's not the same as stationing missile interceptor batteries on Canadian soil but it would certainly integrate with America's missile defence system.

NORAD commander, US general Charles Jacoby, put it this way:  "If Canada decided not to belong to missile defence, then I'm sure that they would continue to play all of their robust roles that they play in missile warning and in other NORAD missions.  And if they did decide (to join), I'm sure we'd take great advantage of the capabilities and commitment that Canada brings to every mission."


After that one, you just might want to take a wet-nap to your butt cheek.

Why Canada Should be Wary of U.S. Missile Defence

There has been talk that Ottawa might jump aboard the U.S. missile defence programme out of fear of a rogue missile launch from North Korea.

Before we do, let's make sure it works.   There are plenty of dirt cheap reasons to think otherwise.

America's hyper-expensive missile interceptors (does that sound familiar, ...cough, cough, F-35) are essentially untested.  Okay, they've been tested with reasonable success against target missile warheads.   They have not, however, been tested against the sort of warheads a 21st century enemy would use, warheads equipped with counter-measures, decoys.  From Reuters:

American scientists have repeatedly pointed out these weaknesses since the 1960s. Yet they have not been addressed, much less corrected.

The new director of the Missile Defense Agency, Vice Admiral James Syring, cited this key problem during House Armed Services Subcommittee hearings last month. Syring talked about “the very difficult problems of lethal object discrimination, limited inventory and cost per kill.”

He explained that the defense system is both costly and ineffective. If the missile interceptors can’t discriminate between the lethal object — the warhead — and the decoys, then limited (and costly) inventory is used up chasing fakes.

The Pentagon’s director of operational test and evaluation, Michael Gilmore, reaffirmed this challenge. “If we can’t discriminate what the real threatening objects are,” Gilmore said, “it doesn’t matter how many ground-based interceptors we have, we won’t be able to hit what needs to be hit.”

And what sort of high-tech countermeasures are involved?  You know those silvery balloons from your kids' birthday parties?  They'll do nicely.   Lightly inflated in the vacuum of space, they'll fly at roughly the same speed as the warhead itself, drawing missile interceptors off their target.   Balloons are dirt cheap while missile interceptors are very, very costly and in limited supply.

How did an untested and unworkable technology make it so far in the Defense Department procurement process? A recent Government Accountability Office report reveals that instead of flying before buying, the Missile Defense Agency has been doing the opposite. Its cart-before-the-horse methodology has resulted in “unexpected cost increases, schedule delays, test problems, and performance shortfalls.” (Sound familiar, F-35 fans?)

The agency’s “tests” are more like rigged “demonstrations.” The intercept team knows all the incoming missile’s parameters ahead of time — a luxury it won’t have during a real attack. Even with this, however, many “demonstrations” ended in dismal failure.

Unfortunately in a Canada in which our defence policy has been decoupled from our defence needs and, instead, has become politically driven (see Afghanistan War, failure of) we have developed a remarkable appetite for high-end junk that doesn't work.   Why does it feel like the Pentagon has become staffed by door-to-door salesmen?

Putin's New American BFF - Mitt Romney

Russian strongman Vlad Putin has a new pet American - Mitt Romney.   Putin told Russian reporters he's grateful to Romney for labeling Russia "America's number one geopolitical foe."

“I’m grateful to [Romney] for formulating his stance so clearly because he has once again proven the correctness of our approach to missile defense problems,” Putin told reporters, according to Russian news agency RIA Novosti.

Russia has long opposed NATO’s plans to build a ballistic missile defense shield, which would theoretically be able to destroy incoming Russian warheads over all of Europe by 2018, and over the United States as well by 2022. According to Putin, this would irrevocably damage Russia’s nuclear deterrent. An interim version of the shield has been up and running since May.

...Although Putin has called President Obama “a very honest man” who is “quite sincere” in his willingness to negotiate with Russia over the issue, he believes that Romney’s aggressive stance vindicates Russia’s refusal to compromise on missile defense.

“The most important thing for us is that even if [Romney] doesn’t win now, he or a person with similar views may come to power in four years. We must take that into consideration while dealing with security issues for a long perspective.”

Stupid Republican bastard.

Deconstructing Detente

Russian president Vlad Putin is scrapping the Conventional Armed Forces in Europe treaty. the pact had been intended to reduce East-West tensions by restricting where each could deploy its forces. The idea was to prevent one side becoming alarmed by the other lining up army divisions along their common border, poised to strike.

Putin, of course, is miffed at Bush's insistence on positioning parts of his anti-ballistic radar and interceptor system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Bush claims the system is intended to deal with a missile attack from a rogue state such as Iran. Putin sees it, instead, as an attempt to contain Russian military power and influence, especially after Bush rejected Putin's offer to use a radar site in Azerbaijan better suited for monitoring the skies over Iran.

The Russian move has NATO and the US furious which is a tad strange given that Washington and several NATO states never ratified the treaty in the first place. Yet the Euros probably won't do very much more than whine given their dependence on Russia for natural gas supply.