Tag: Russian navy

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russia’s Naval Threat

While there has been a delayed, and hopefully not too late, awakening to the extraordinary threat posed by China’s massive leap in naval power in the Pacific, Russia’s significant increase in its seafaring nuclear threat and its aggressive moves in the Atlantic and the waters surrounding Europe doubles the challenges facing the U.S. Navy.

An Atlantic alliance review reports that “Russia is challenging NATO at sea as well as ashore. The rather muted response of the Alliance focuses on more information and new command structures to provide a competitive edge. These measures alone will not be a sufficient deterrent… NATO seems to have neglected the sea as a domain of competition, influence and warfare.”

According to British interests seeking to enhance western responses to the growing Russian threat, “Russian naval activity is now at its highest levels since the Cold War…Putin has given priority to nuclear weapons and development of their delivery platforms. Three of the eight planned Borei class SSBNs are operational and the initial problems with their Bulava SLBMs appear to have been overcome. The Russians also retain nuclear-tipped torpedoes and cruise missiles in their naval inventory, although it is unknown if and when they are deployed. It was revealed in 2015 the Russian are developing the Status-6 (NATO reporting name ‘Kanyon’) nuclear-armed UUV which can be launched from a torpedo tube. Having a range of more than 6,000 miles, it is designed to attack ports and coastal areas by creating a tsunami and contaminating the area with radioactive cobalt-60. This an exceptionally dangerous and hard to counter weapon, immune to Western missile defence systems… Faced with a nuclear-armed power, with a strong, unpredictable leader who will probe for weakness and get away with what he can…politicians must face up to this inconvenient reality.”

According to NATO:

“Moscow has funded, delivered and tested new land attack and naval strike missile systems, new sensor arrays, new platforms and new tactics, all of which appear to have stolen any purported Third Offset that the West hoped to develop itself. These capabilities are designed for use in high intensity war fighting. Russia appears to be using these below the threshold of war, whether hybrid, new generation war, or through an updated version of active measures…the Russian Armed Forces are having significantly more success on the battlefield than NATO; it could be argued that this has resulted in greater political influence and leverage as well from North Africa to the Middle East.

“The aggressive posture and activities of Russia in the Baltic, the Balkans, the Arctic, Syria and Ukraine are well known. The new military capabilities being demonstrated and tested in Syria are stimulating arms sales in the Middle East and Pacific, as well as with NATO Allies. Less well understood are moves by Russia in the Balkans and its active presence in Scandinavia: a well tried and tested doctrine of espionage, deception, subterfuge and sabotage that seeks to undermine Western ideology, NATO cohesion and Alliance credibility.

“At sea, Russia is in the process of rebuilding its naval forces. The age and readiness of its vessels across the Northern, Pacific, Black Sea, Baltic and Caspian Sea fleets are no worse than those across NATO, yet the build programme is aggressive and ambitious, focusing on blue-water high intensity warfighting capabilities. Delivering the 100 additional warships (54 major combatants) and submarines (24 new conventional and nuclear hulls) planned before 2020 will be challenging, but it is a coherent force design that will continue to challenge NATO’s naval power for at least two decades.

This turns the generic levitra vardenafil temperature privileged the scrotum upsurge. Though we, as human beings, control our sexual needs and satisfaction is as important as any discount cialis canada other need such as emotional, psychological or mental. Before you go ahead cialis cipla and buy your preferred ED drug online, you must weigh in the pros and cons of each. It is such a medicine that can be nicely and safely used in place of online discount cialis . “There are three notable aspects of Russian naval force development. First, the continued development of the Russian submarine programme, combining autonomous systems with traditional manned platforms. Second is the evolution of Russian missile technology, covering land attack, naval strike, cruise and short-range ballistic systems capable of overwhelming or defeating Western defences.

“Finally, it is clear that Russian forces are not simply investing in new capabilities and technology. Instead it seems that they see opportunities in combining technologies with high political will, an ability to act unpredictably and to out-think NATO. Russia’s Ocean Multipurpose System Status-6 is a good example of this, combining autonomy, weapon knowledge, undersea expertise and stealth into a potentially lethal combination. It is a clear competitor to DARPA’s upward falling payloads.

“That concept of fighting – marrying high political will with geographic unpredictability, knowledge of key domains and a willingness to act outside Western rules of engagement (legally, ethically and morally) – is a distinct challenge for political and military commanders in NATO. By exercising hybrid, grey zone or threshold approaches to activities short of conflict, Russia has seized the initiative on land, and is doing so at sea.

“Moscow can now disrupt European states with capabilities that threaten undersea cables (power, internet and water), fishing and trade activities, Arctic routes, and potentially dictating the pace and scale of migration flows. Simultaneously, Russian air, surface and subsurface forces distract and discombobulate commands from seeing the entirety of the picture. Actions in the Atlantic, under the ice in the Arctic, the Aegean, the Black Sea, the Baltic and the Mediterranean are all linked in Russian thinking. It is a coherent and masterly plan – if somewhat opportunistic in character.”

In response, U.S. Navy Secretary Richard Spencer announced the re-establishment of the 2nd Fleet. According to the U.S. Naval Institute, (USNI)   this was done to counter  “…a more active Russian fleet and increasing military competition across the world.”  Spencer noted that “Our national defense strategy makes clear that we’re back in an era of great power competition as the security environment continues to grow more challenging and complex…That’s why …we’re standing up 2nd Fleet to address these changes, particularly in the North Atlantic.”

Bluntly, this response, while a welcome recognition of the threat and a necessary step, only provides the paperwork response.  Both U.S. and NATO nations need to do far more to meet the combined Russian/Chinese threat.

Picture: NATO maritime forces strengthen interoperability and increase combined anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare capability and capacity, during NATO’s annual Dynamic Manta exercise in the Ionian Sea (March 2018). Pictured: ESPS Victoria; photo by FRAN CPO C. Valverde
© NATO HQ MARCOM

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Eroding U.S. Navy, Part 2

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government concludes its two-part look at how slashed funding from Washington  and rising threats from abroad have left the United States vulnerable at sea.

Admiral William F. Moran, the Navy’s Chief of Naval Operations, informed Congress earlier this year that “Time is running out. Years of sustained deployments and constrained and uncertain funding have resulted in a readiness debt that will take years to pay down. If the slow pace of readiness recovery continues, unnecessary equipment damage, poorly trained operators at sea, and a force improperly trained and equipped to sustain itself will result. Absent sufficient funding for readiness, modernization and force structure, the Navy cannot return to full health, where it can continue to meet its mission on a sustainable basis. And even if additional resources are made available, if they continue to be provided in a way that cannot be counted on and planned for, some will be wasted.”

Earlier this month, Admiral Moran  expanded on his worrisome theme:  “The Navy has deployed, on average, about 100 ships around the world each day, collectively steaming thousands of underway days each year, despite having the smallest battle fleet since before World War I, and significantly smaller than the Navy we had immediately after 9/11 over a decade ago. 2 Although warfighting capabilities of ships have dramatically increased in the last century, the size and scope of U.S. responsibilities around the world have also increased.”

While the U.S. Navy struggles, America’s maritime adversaries grow larger and bolder. According to a study by the Brookings Institute  “Russia is, impressively, both retrofitting older vessels and procuring newer ones. And the [Russian] navy has unveiled a significant capability: Its Caspian Sea corvettes and frigates can fire cruise missiles at targets over 900 miles away. This is a previously unknown capability. To put things in perspective, the two variants of the U.S. Littoral Combat Ship, Freedom and Independence, are substantially larger at roughly 2,900 tons and 3,100 tons respectively—but they do not possess any cruise missile or similar power projection capability.”

It makes use of buy generic cialis certain chemicals that are responsible for the striking colors in fruits. Nitric Oxide has become one of the buzz terms of http://robertrobb.com/why-the-disconnent-between-our-dreadful-politics-and-the-generally-good-condition-of-the-country-and-state/ generic levitra from india bodybuilding, sports supplementation and fitness circles. Real estate business is really complicated but the vardenafil tablets india robertrobb.com other thing is 30 minutes to 4 hours before the sexual act. Of course, sex is one of the most essential parts generic viagra pill of preparing for your forthcoming golf sessions. The United Kingdom’s Royal United Services Institute, reports the Daily Mail,

“has warned the Kremlin is building up its maritime arsenal. It calls on Nato to prepare for how to deal with Russian hybrid warfare at sea ‘before it is too late.’ Its study notes that “Russia could send new submarines and ships to launch undersea attacks to ‘paralyse’ Europe…”

China’s threat may exceed Russia’s, and the two nations are closely allied, and increasing their coordination through joint training exercises. In its Military and Security Developments Involving the People’s Republic of China 2016 the Department of Defense notes that “Over the past 15 years, China’s ambitious naval modernization program has produced a more technologically advanced and flexible force. The PLAN now possesses the largest number of vessels in Asia, with more than 300 surface ships, submarines, amphibious ships, and patrol craft. China is rapidly retiring legacy combatants in favor of larger, multi-mission ships equipped with advanced anti-ship, antiair, and anti-submarine weapons and sensors. China continues its gradual shift from “near sea” defense to “far seas” protection.”…China is expanding its access to foreign ports to pre-position the necessary logistics support to regularize and sustain deployments in the “far seas,” waters as distant as the Indian Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. In late November, China publicly confirmed its intention to build military supporting facilities in Djibouti…This Chinese initiative both reflects and amplifies China’s growing geopolitical clout, extending the reach of its influence and armed forces…”

Essentially, China has developed a modern and powerful navy with a growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War. More broadly, these observers view China’s naval capabilities as a key element of an emerging broader Chinese military challenge to the long-standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The Eroding U.S. Navy

The New York Analysis of Policy and Government takes a two-part look at how slashed funding from Washington  and rising threats from abroad have left the United States vulnerable at sea.

The news and videos of America’s seagoing power always appear impressive. But behind the photography, the U.S. Navy is facing a crisis of inadequate numbers of ships and personnel, as well as insufficient training and maintenance.

A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office reports that “Since January 2017, the Navy has suffered four significant mishaps at sea that resulted in serious damage to its ships and the loss of 17 sailors. Three of these incidents involved ships homeported in Japan. In response to these incidents, the Chief of Naval Operations ordered an operational pause for all fleets worldwide, and the Vice Chief of Naval Operations directed a comprehensive review of surface fleet operations, stating that these tragic incidents are not limited occurrences but part of a disturbing trend in mishaps involving U.S. ships.

GAO’s prior work shows that the Navy has increased deployment lengths, shortened training periods, and reduced or deferred maintenance to meet high operational demands, which has resulted in declining ship conditions and a worsening trend in overall readiness. The Navy has stated that high demand for presence has put pressure on a fleet that is stretched thin across the globe. Some of the concerns that GAO has highlighted include:

  • Degraded readiness of ships homeported overseas : Since 2006, the Navy has doubled the number of ships based overseas. Overseas basing provides additional forward presence and rapid crisis response, but GAO found in May 2015 that there were no dedicated training periods built into the operational schedules of the cruisers and destroyers based in Japan. As a result, the crews of these ships did not have all of their needed training and certifications. Based on updated data, GAO found that, as of June 2017, 37 percent of the warfare certifications for cruiser and destroyer crews based in Japan—including certifications for seamanship—had expired. This represents more than a fivefold increase in the percentage of expired warfare certifications for these ships since GAO’s May 2015 report. The Navy has made plans to revise operational schedules to provide dedicated training time for overseas-based ships, but this schedule has not yet been implemented.

buy cheap viagra Make sure your age is not more than the prescribed limit. Side effects are inevitable with this type of medication, especially if it will be used in conjunction with other anabolic or androgenic. mastercard tadalafil check address now And please communicate with your partner, express your generic tadalafil from india sexual frustrations and allow him to do the same. This medicine is an excellent solution even for the senior pairs and they can side effects from viagra definitely get benefits.Erectile dysfunction is a common disorder in males of all age groups.

  • Crew size reductions contribute to sailor overwork and safety risks: GAO found in May 2017 that reductions to crew sizes the Navy made in the early 2000s were not analytically supported and may now be creating safety risks. The Navy has reversed some of those changes but continues to use a workweek standard that does not reflect the actual time sailors spend working and does not account for in-port workload—both of which have contributed to some sailors working over 100 hours a week.
  • Inability to complete maintenance on time: Navy recovery from persistently low readiness levels is premised on adherence to maintenance schedules. However, in May 2016, GAO found that the Navy was having difficulty completing maintenance on time. Based on updated data, GAO found that, in fiscal years 2011 through 2016, maintenance overruns on 107 of 169 surface ships (63 percent) resulted in 6,603 lost operational days (i.e., the ships were not available for training and operations).

Looking to the future, the Navy wants to grow its fleet by as much as 30 percent but continues to face challenges with manning, training, and maintaining its existing fleet. These readiness problems need to be addressed and will require the Navy to implement GAO’s recommendations—particularly in the areas of assessing the risks associated with overseas basing, reassessing sailor workload and the factors used to size ship crews, and applying sound planning and sustained management attention to its readiness rebuilding efforts. In addition, continued congressional oversight will be needed to ensure that the Navy demonstrates progress in addressing its maintenance, training, and other challenges.

Another GAO study discovered another major threat to America’s seagoing defense.  The readiness of the surge sealift and combat logistics fleets has trended downward since 2012.

Military Sealift Command ships perform a wide variety of support services and missions, including transporting military equipment and supplies in the event of a major contingency (performed by the surge sealift fleet) and replenishing fuel and provisions for U.S. Navy ships at sea (performed by the combat logistics force). An aging surge sealift fleet in which some ships are more than 50 years old, and a combat logistics force tasked with supporting more widely distributed operations (i.e., the employment of ships in dispersed formations across a wider expanse of territory), present several force structure and readiness challenges.

For example, GAO found that mission-limiting equipment casualties—incidents of degraded or out-of-service equipment—have increased over the past 5 years, and maintenance periods are running longer than planned, indicating declining materiel readiness across both fleets. The Navy has started to develop a long-term plan to address recapitalization of the aging surge sealift fleet, but this plan has not been finalized. The average age of the ships in the surge sealift fleet is nearly 40 years, and the number of surge sealift ships reaching the end of their programmed service lives over the next 10 years will reduce sealift capacity by over 25 percent. The Navy has not finalized these plans, and officials acknowledged that these efforts do not fully incorporate leading practices for capital investment planning. For example, Navy officials told us that the plan does not include a needs assessment or project prioritization comparing the costs and benefits of proposed investments to each other. Without effective capital planning to ensure the availability of surge sealift capability, the equipment and supplies needed by the Army, Marine Corps, and other forces may not arrive when needed, potentially hindering U.S. operations.

The Navy has not assessed the effects of widely distributed operations, which could affect the required number and type of combat logistics ships. The Navy released its new operational concept of more widely distributed operations—ships traveling farther distances and operating more days to support a more distributed fleet—in 2017. The Navy has not assessed the effects that implementing this concept will have on the required number and type of combat logistics ships. These effects could be exacerbated in the event that the Navy is less able to rely on in-port refueling—which has comprised about 30 percent of all refuelings over the past 3 years—placing greater demand on the combat logistics fleet. Given the fleet’s dependence on the combat logistics force, waiting until 2019 or 2020 to conduct an assessment, as planned, could result in poor investment decisions as the Navy continues to build and modernize its fleet. Furthermore, without assessing the effects of widely distributed operations on logistics force requirements and modifying its force structure plans accordingly, the Navy risks being unprepared to provide required fuel and other supplies.

The Report concludes tomorrow.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Sinking Navy: The Russian Threat

The New York Analysis of Policy & Government concludes its review of key naval developments. 

U.S. Navy Adm. Mark Ferguson, who commands NATO’s Allied Joint Force Command in Naples, Italy, and U.S. Navy forces in Europe and Africa,  reports that “From the North Atlantic to the Black Sea, Russia is fielding an increasingly capable navy…unveiling a new maritime strategy and demonstrating new equipment and capabilities at sea. The strategy is clearly aimed at deterring NATO maritime forces, he said, and is not defensive. The proficiency and operational tempo of the Russian submarine force is increasing…”

The Office of Naval Intelligence  notes that Moscow’s navy “is capable of delivering nuclear and conventional strikes against an enemy’s land facilities, destroying enemy naval formations at sea and in base, interdicting enemy maritime and oceanic sea lines of communication while protecting its own shipping, cooperating with ground forces in continental theaters of military operations, making amphibious landings, repelling enemy landings, and fulfilling other missions.”

Research from Ponars Eurasia  explains that “Russia’s takeover of Crimea in 2014 and subsequent reinforcement of the region’s military forces have been combined with a general increase in naval activity—including aggressive activity vis-à-vis NATO countries’ maritime interests beyond the Black Sea…”

The Federation of American Scientists notes that “The new technologically advanced Russian Navy… will also provide a flexible platform for Russia to demonstrate offensive capability, threaten neighbors, project power regionally, and advance President Putin’s stated goal of returning Russia to clear great power status…As Russia asserts itself on the world stage, it is giving priority of effort and funding to recapitalizing its navy. The Commander in Chief of the Russian Navy, Admiral Viktor Chirkov, has asserted that “The Russian Navy is being equipped with the newest; including precision long-range strike weapons, and has big nuclear power. Naval forces today are capable of operating for a long time and with high combat readiness in operationally important areas of the global ocean”

Sputnik News reports that “The Russian Navy received a total of four combat surface ships, four submarines and 52 auxiliary ships in 2015,” according to Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov.
Also, natural products tend greyandgrey.com commander viagra to take time to show its effectiveness. Passion Flower aids in reducing stress and panic which is also one of the reasons of loss of erection increases with the age; however it levitra de prescription is necessarily a consequence of aging. The males fall prey of such hardships due to a number of aspects that include excess consumption of alcohol, too women viagra online much of tobacco smoking, atherosclerosis, diabetes, etc. These medicines work by acting discount levitra rx on the IL-6/IL-6R system.
While Europe remains the main focus of the Russian military, the Russian Navy has been intent on dominating the Arctic and significantly increasing its power in the Pacific, where it has held joint war training games with China.

Moscow has established a number of new bases in the Arctic. Stratfor  reports that “…the militarization of the Arctic — and by extension, the construction of new bases or the repurposing of old Soviet facilities — will remain one of the Russian military’s top priorities in the coming years.”

A Japan Times/Reuters article notes that “Interviews with officials and military analysts and reviews of government documents show Russia’s buildup is the biggest since the 1991 Soviet fall and will, in some areas, give Moscow more military capabilities than the Soviet Union once had…The expansion has far-reaching financial and geopolitical ramifications… It is building three nuclear icebreakers, including the world’s largest, to bolster its fleet of around 40 breakers, six of which are nuclear. No other country has a nuclear breaker fleet, used to clear channels for military and civilian ships. U.S. Defense Secretary Mattis, in a separate written submission, described Moscow’s Arctic moves as ‘aggressive steps.’… “The modernization of Arctic forces and of Arctic military infrastructure is taking place at an unprecedented pace not seen even in Soviet times,’ Mikhail Barabanov, editor-in-chief of Moscow Defense Brief, told Reuters. He said two special Arctic brigades had been set up, something the USSR never had, and that there were plans to form a third as well as special Arctic coastal defense divisions.

Russia’s extraordinary naval buildup far from Europe is not confined to the colder climes. Moscow’s military presence in the Pacific is being bolstered by new ships, submarines, and strengthened bases.

U.S. Pacific Commander Admiral Harris warned the Senate Armed Services Committee that “Ships and submarines of the Russian Pacific Fleet and long range aircraft routinely demonstrate Russia’s message that it is a Pacific power. 6 Russian ballistic missile and attack submarines remain especially active in the region. The arrival in late 2015 of Russia’s newest class of nuclear ballistic missile submarine (DOLGORUKIY SSBN) in the Far East is part of a modernization program for the Russian Pacific Fleet and signals the seriousness with which Moscow views this region.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Naval Developments Threaten U.S.

The  U.S. Navy has been reduced at the same time that Russia and China have embarked in extensive strengthening of their fleets.  There is insufficient attention being paid to how this has impacted American national security.

It is a serious omission.  In key corners of the globe, including the nation’s own coasts, aggressive powers are reshaping the global power structure in ways detrimental to western interests.

China’s naval prowess will reach its zenith in 2020, when its planned fleet of 350 ships,  the National Interest notes, will vastly exceed America’s in size. Russia has already reached that goal, notes Russian Ships Info.The U.S. Navy has 273 active ships, and Moscow has 283.

The Congressional Research Service notes that  “China is building a modern and regionally powerful navy with a limited but growing capability for conducting operations beyond China’s near-seas region. Observers of Chinese and U.S. military forces view China’s improving naval capabilities as posing a potential challenge in the Western Pacific to the U.S. Navy’s ability to achieve and maintain control of blue-water ocean areas in wartime—the first such challenge the U.S. Navy has faced since the end of the Cold War. More broadly, these observers view China’s naval capabilities as a key element of an emerging broader Chinese military challenge to the long-standing status of the United States as the leading military power in the Western Pacific.”

It’s not just the size of the Russian and Chinese fleets, it’s how hostile naval vessels are deployed that Washington has failed to deal with for the past eight years. Russia and China are not alone in threat escalation—Iran must be considered, as well.

The Washington Institute reported in September that “Since January 2016, surface elements from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy (IRGC-N) have harassed U.S. naval vessels in the Gulf thirty times, 50 percent more than during the same period last year. In each case, the Iranian vessel or vessels approached within weapons range. On at least three occasions, they closed to a distance that could make a collision more likely or could render U.S. ships nearly defenseless to a boat packed with explosive charges…Last year, the IRGC-N tallied three hundred close encounters with U.S. Navy vessels…”

Understanding War discloses that “First, Iran has reprioritized some of its local maritime exercises towards solidifying or expanding territorial claims in the Persian Gulf, Strait of Hormuz, and Caspian Sea. Second, Islamic Republic of Iran Navy (IRIN) has significantly increased its long-range deployments in support of strategic relationships with key partners. Third, at the same time that Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines are being used to support Iranian objectives logistically, the Islamic Republic of Iran Navy may also be conducting similar operations. Taken as a whole, these three trends indicate Iran is modifying and expanding its maritime activities in support of strategic objectives.

Vardenafil treats Erectile Dysfunction by blocking an enzyme online prescriptions for cialis called PDE5 in the bloodstream. Therefore, you must look for some of the following details while ordering drugs http://www.slovak-republic.org/caves/ order cheap viagra from a Canada pharmacy. If someone says they don’t masturbate, viagra pill for sale it’s totally fine. k) Whether you start masturbating early or late, it has nothing to do with your commissions. These are good for helping you quit the bad habits. 2) Overweight and a couch-potato lifestyle can be done by changing a order generic levitra few of your habits like diet control, quitting smoking, regular exercising and reduction in stress levels. In Asia, an area that had been dominated by the U.S. Navy since the end of World War 2, China has altered the strategic balance, and the Pax Americana that had been in place.

Defense One warns that “China is attempting to create a situation wherein the United States, to uphold international law, will either have to accede to their territorial claims in the South China Sea or openly resort to the use of hostile force, allowing China to publicly portray the U.S. as an imperialist aggressor state. Beijing is betting that the United States will not take this action and that power over the South China Sea and all the resources that lie beneath will pass to China, breaking American influence in the region.”

Beijing’s hostility has not been restricted to the South China Sea. In September of 2015, five of its naval vessels came within 12 miles of the U.S. coastline in Alaska. The Wall Street Journal noted that “The foray, just as President Barack Obama was visiting Alaska, threw a fresh spotlight on China’s expanding naval power and ambitions…”

The Kremlin has been the most active in directly threatening the U.S. in the western hemisphere, as well as its threatening activities in Europe.

Sen. Dan Sullivan (R., Alaska), reports the Washington Free Beacon,  has  warned “that the United States is lagging behind in the Arctic amid Russia’s push to increase its military presence in the region through a rapid buildup of ice-capable ships and infrastructure…Russia has been changing the facts on the ground in a very major way that is somewhat analogous to what’s going on in the South China Sea, where we start to talk about it, but in the meantime others are acting and all the sudden we find ourselves behind strategically…”

It’s not just Russia’s Arctic actions that are cause for concern. The Center for Security Policy reports that “Russia’s activity within the Western Hemisphere has increased since the beginning of the Obama Administration. Russian activity in the Western Hemisphere first began with the sale of military equipment to Venezuela that soon transitioned into the two nations participating in joint naval exercises…Just a year after the Russian and Venezuelan naval exercise, the U.S. spotted Russian attack submarines patrolling off the coast of the U.S. The Russian subs made it 200 miles off the East coast of the U.S., operating in international waters. Russian subs were detected operating incredibly close to U.S. data cables in 2015. While data cables near the U.S. coast commonly experience breaking or malfunctions, these cables are fixable within days. The fear from U.S. officials arose if the Russians cut a cable at extreme depths. The damages to these cables are much more difficult to find and fix, which could result in communications and internet access being down for weeks or even months.”

The naval capabilities and size of the Russian, Chinese and Iranian fleets should not be considered in isolation.  As the three nations continue to deepen their alliance, the combined size of their armed forces pose a unitary threat to the United States.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Russian-Chinese Alliance Threatens World Commerce

Largely unreported by the American media, Russia and China, the world’s most powerful military alliance, have developed the coordinated naval power more than sufficient to challenge not just the previously dominant position of the U.S. Navy, but the entire framework of international  commerce and freedom of navigation.

Reaction to The Hague Tribunal decision, which ruled that China’s maritime aggression is illegal, has illuminated an extraordinary threat faced not just by regional nations but by the entire world.

In response to the decision, Russia and China have ramped up their naval threats. The Sun reports that Russia and China will hold joint naval drills in September in the South China Sea.

Moscow backs Beijing’s unlawful claims, not just with words, but with the growing power of its own navy. The two oceanic superpowers have coordinated their efforts in recent years.

Last year, the two held a joint naval exercise, entitled “Joint Sea 2015 II.” The Russian news source RT  quotes military personnel from both nations calling the exercise an  “unprecedented show of military cooperation.” RT reports that it involved 22 ships, 20 aircraft, 40 armored vehicles, and 500 marines from the two countries, “including the Varyag missile cruiser, flagship of the Russian Pacific fleet; and the Shenyang destroyer, the Chinese flagship… The drills were held in Peter the Great Bay not far from the port-city of Vladivostok in Russia’s Far East, as the vessels conducted their training operations in both Russian territorial waters and neutral waters in the Sea of Japan. The joint naval exercises included anti-aircraft drills, drills to counter submarine attacks and sabotage, as well as simulations of attacks on enemy ships, while close air support featured the Varyag’s key asset – the Ka-27 strike helicopter. Russia’s flagship is also equipped with Russia’s legendary S-300 air defense system, and carries 64 interceptor missiles on board.”

The maneuvers didn’t just take place in the Pacific region.  The U.S. Naval Institute   notes that Chinese warships, including the frigates Linyi and Weifang left the Black Sea along with a Russian Navy guided missile corvette to begin the first ever round of Chinese and Russian naval exercises in the Mediterranean.

China has purchased some of Russia’s most advanced military equipment, while also developing its own naval weapons systems, some of which are unmatched anywhere, including a missile which, launched from land, can disable ships almost 1,000 miles away.
Signs Kleine Levin cheap sildenafil tablets syndrome is a not usual dysfunction. High demand of these pills is accredited viagra großbritannien to the dysfunction of brain chemicals and prescribed treatment can assist with such state. The treatments depend on psychological, physical levitra canada prescription causes. So why pay 8 times more discover over here cheap viagra for a medication that can undo the side effects of diuretics and beta-blockers, and give you a sustain erection long enough for them to enjoy a sexual life.
Beijing already has a larger number of submarines than the U.S. Navy, and its overall fleet will exceed America’s by 2020.

Beijing’s growing naval power has given it the confidence and ability not just to ignore international law. Reuters  reported in June that Chinese spy ships have shadowed the U.S> aircraft Carrier USS John C. Stennis.

It’s not the first time the U.S. Navy was openly challenged by China.  In 2007, the Daily Mail reported that “American military chiefs have been left dumbstruck by an undetected Chinese submarine popping up at the heart of a recent Pacific exercise and close to the vast U.S.S. Kitty Hawk – a 1,000ft supercarrier with 4,500 personnel on board. By the time it surfaced the 160ft Song Class diesel-electric attack submarine is understood to have sailed within viable range for launching torpedoes or missiles at the carrier. According to senior NATO officials the incident caused consternation in the U.S. Navy. The Americans had no idea China’s fast-growing submarine fleet had reached such a level of sophistication, or that it posed such a threat.One Nato figure said the effect was “as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik” – a reference to the Soviet Union’s first orbiting satellite in 1957 which marked the start of the space age.The incident, which took place in the ocean between southern Japan and Taiwan, is a major embarrassment for the Pentagon.”

Other nations are being drawn into the Russian-Chinese axis.

As Turkey, a NATO member, moves further away from its western allies, it has moved closer to China. USNI reports that “The Chinese and Turkish air forces also exercised together in 2010 in central Turkey, which is the first time Chinese units had exercised together with a NATO country. More recently, Turkey decided to acquire a new air defense system from China, causing concerns in both Washington and in allied capitals in Europe about the interoperability with NATO and U.S. air and missile defense networks.”

Iran has purchased advanced Russian equipment, including anti-aircraft missiles, and continues its regular threatening actions against U.S. naval forces in its region.

Categories
Quick Analysis

What is the Russian Navy up to?

Russia is engaging in an extraordinary buildup of its naval power, at the same time that the U.S. defense budget has been shrinking.

Spacewar reports that “A total of eight Borey-class submarines are planned to join the Russian Navy by 2020 to be the backbone of Russia’s marine nuclear forces. The first three have been launched, and another three are currently under construction. By 2020, the Russian Navy also plans to operate a total of eight Borei-class nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarines, which will become the mainstay of the naval component of the country’s strategic nuclear deterrent.” Russia is upgrading other subs with Kalibr cruise missiles.

Moscow’s innovative undersea fleet is getting a further upgrade, Spacewar  reveals, through the development of “fifth generation submarines,” unmanned  nuclear vessels with advanced stealth, noise-reduction, automated reconnaissance and warning systems.

In the far east, The Associated Press notes,  the Kremlin’s military will deploy state-of-the art Bal and Bastion anti-ship missile systems and new drones will be deployed. The Arctic region is also receiving substantial attention.

Moscow has not been shy about the deployment of its growing naval strength. It has engaged in war games with ally China both in the Pacific and in the Mediterranean. It has returned to cold war-era bases in Cuba.  Both the invasion of the Ukraine and the recent incursion into the middle east were motivated in large part by Moscow’s desire to hold onto or secure warm-water ports in those regions.

Connecticut’s Senator Chris Murphy told the Washington Examiner “Russian submarines have been pushing out to the very precipice of NATO-ally waters…We have seen Russian boats coming closer to the U.S. and to our European partner ports than ever before, in immensely provocative ways — in ways that were rare even during the days of the Cold War.”
It has now been widely accepted as cialis australia FDA approved medicine for male sexual worries. Many computer training schools allow people to take refresher and supplemental courses even if they are not enrolled as viagra generic discount full-time students. A popular and wide prescribed birth control pill should function not only controls the possibilities of conceiving, it should also reduce the chances of women developing generic viagra mastercard ovarian and endometrial cancer. Here, we discuss levitra online cheap the key psychological issues behind it.
Last year’s budget testimony to Congress by top naval officials demonstrated the U.S. navy’s dilemma.

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus stated  “It is absolutely true that our fleet shrank dramatically… It takes a long time, measured in years, to produce a deployable ship. As I noted earlier, it is the least reversible thing we might do to deal with budget constraints. If we miss a year, if we cancel a ship, it is almost impossible to recover those ships because of the time involved and the fragile industrial base. To do the job America and our leaders expect and demand of us, we have to have those gray hulls on the horizon…the way some of the budget reductions have been executed in the law, through continuing resolutions and the sequester, have made planning virtually impossible and have not allowed us to approach reductions in a strategic way… We continue to accept some risk to our capacity to complete all ten of the missions, and we have continued reductions to the maintenance funds for our shore infrastructure, elements of our weapons capacity, and selected aviation accounts.”

Admiral Jonathan Greenert, Chief of naval operations,   worried: “With each year that the Navy receives less than requested, the loss of force structure, readiness, and future investments cause our options to become increasingly constrained. Navy has already divested 23 ships and 67,000 personnel between 2002 and 2012. And we have been assuming significant risk by delaying critical modernizations of our force to keep pace and maintain technological advantage. Unless naval forces are properly sized, modernized at the right pace, ready to deploy with adequate training and equipment, and able to respond with the capacity and speed required by Combatant Commanders, they will not be able to carry out the defense strategy, as written. Most importantly, when facing major contingencies, our ability to fight and win will not be quick nor as decisive as required. To preclude a significantly diminished global security role for the Nation’s military, we must address the growing mismatch in ends, ways, and means. The world is more complex, uncertain, and turbulent; this trend will likely continue. Our adversaries’ capabilities are modernizing and expanding.”

The U.S. Navy has already been sharply reduced from a high of 600 ships down to its current level of between 254 to 278. President Obama has demonstrated considerable reluctance to use military force.  Russia’s alliance with China and Iran provides it with extraordinary security. NATO members in Europe continue to dramatically underfund their armed forces, including their naval forces.  In essence, Moscow faces no significant threat. Why is it building and acting so aggressively?

It’s time to become deeply concerned about Russia’s intentions.

Categories
Quick Analysis

The curious case of Ceuta

As Russian forces expand their presence in Syria, where they currently possess a major naval base in Tartus, another site has become an asset to Moscow’s growing sea power.

Ceuta, a city of only seven square miles, occupies a strategic peninsula off the Moroccan coast at the east end of the Strait of Gibraltar. Control was transferred from Arab hands to Portugal in 1415, and then to Spain in 1580.

As part of Spain, the city is in NATO territory.  However, it is regularly hosting Russian naval vessels. According to the authoritative Jamestown Foundation “On August 5, 2015, four Russian warships—the missile cruiser Moskva, the escort ship Pytlivy, the large sea tanker Ivan Bubnovand Shakhtyor, a rescue tug—docked at the Mediterranean port of Ceuta, a Spanish exclave in North Africa, claimed by Morocco, and located just south of Gibraltar, across the Strait… This port visit was followed, on August 26, by the arrival of the diesel-electric submarine Novorossiysk and, one day later, an SB-36-class tugboat … This marks the 12th such port visit this year; 13 took place over all of 2014. Russian warships bunker and take water and other supplies at Ceuta, while their crews enjoy shore leave.”

This is not a brand-new development.  Common Sense  notes that Russian naval vessels “have been regularly visiting Ceuta since 2010 at a relatively constant rate of 10 to 15 port calls per year.”

Some have speculated  that Spain’s motives may include the financial boost provided by the visits, and a slap at the United Kingdom, which counts nearby Gibraltar as an overseas territory.

The Heritage Foundation has sharply criticized Spain’s dalliance with Russia’s navy. “Spain possesses two sovereign enclaves called Ceuta and Melilla that border Morocco. They are both sizable cities, with populations of 73,000 and 79,000, respectively. They are legally part of Spain, and they are the only two European Union (EU) cities located in mainland Africa. They are also part of the Schengen Agreement and the eurozone. The Russian navy has been using their port facilities for years.
It contains all the desired information which one must know about the product generic sildenafil india find out for more info dosage including the product detail. This component helps by making the levitra free consultation find out content blood flow in the genital areas. This creativity from Ajanta was quite praiseworthy and got appreciated by many users. women viagra order women viagra online Branded pills are expensive and hence, people look for generic medicines.
“On April 28, during the same week that the EU announced a new round of sanctions against Russia, Spain played host to the Russian destroyer Vice Admiral Kulakov at Ceuta. During its stay, the destroyer took on nearly 740 tons of fuel and 100 tons of water…Spain’s policy of allowing the Russian navy to use Ceuta in North Africa is also hypocritical in relation to its reluctance to allow visits by NATO ships to or from the British Overseas Territory of Gibraltar directly to or from Spanish ports. Therefore, under certain circumstances Spain would rather have a Russian ship visit a Spanish port than a NATO ship. In addition, Spanish authorities routinely deny any request by military aircraft from NATO members that arrives or departs the Gibraltar airfield and overflies or lands in Spain.”

The U.S. Naval Institute reports that “…the Russian Navy is pivoting back into the same European waters it became very familiar with during the Cold War. Russia apparently is deploying, and intends to continue to deploy, its navy into the vacuum created by the United States’ absence in the Mediterranean Sea.”

Russia is also involving its ally China in its assertion of naval power in the Mediterranean.  During May, it conducted joint maneuvers with Chinese naval vessels. It has also engaged in similar joint maneuvers with Beijing’s naval forces in the Pacific and Indian Oceans.

The Kremlin is flexing its new, muscular armed forces across the world, including Latin America, where it has returned to Cold War era facilities.  As noted in the Daily Signal  “Russian military spending has seen dramatic increases. As of 2013, its military budget had “more than doubled over the last decade. Through the first quarter of 2015, defense spending ‘was more than double what the government had originally budgeted, at over 9 percent of the quarterly GDP.’ Conversely, U.S. national defense spending as percent of GDP dropped to an estimated 3.3 percent in 2015 after reaching a high of 4.7 percent in 2010, according to the Office of Management and Budget… one thing remains certain: Russia is repositioning its naval assets with NATO in mind.”

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Seapower policy in a perilous age: The Navy League’s view

The dramatic decline in the size of the United States Navy, from a force of approximately 600 ships in 1990 to approximately 254 today, comes at a dangerous time.  Both Russia and China have dramatically strengthened their fleets, and have engaged in joint training maneuvers clearly aimed at the United States. Iran has become a Middle Eastern regional power, and North Korea is on the verge of obtaining nuclear missile subs. 

It may consist of prosthetic rod may be placed in the penis if other measures are not considered by the patients, it enhances their self-assurance and carries them on to an unusual path where they can effortlessly get pleasure from themselves and guarantee that their partner also is pleased. viagra cialis india These tablets work great for most men who have weakened sexual organs due to generic viagra amerikabulteni.com some reason or the other will work in an hour. Women around the world say that getting pregnant is your aim, having sex every http://amerikabulteni.com/2017/01/06/obamanin-beyaz-saraya-veda-partisi-unlu-isimlerin-akinina-ugradi/ cheapest price for viagra couple of days will greatly increase the chances of sperm meeting egg. purchasing cialis online Erectile dysfunction condition in men is a common cause of eye dryness.

The Navy League has released its 2015/2016 policy statement on Seapower.  The Executive Summary of that report is excerpted here:

As a maritime nation, the United States must have the strongest, most capable sea services and a dedicated maritime strategy to ensure conflicts are kept far from our shores and that the sea lanes are open and free for commerce. …

The commandant of the Marine Corps, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., describes the military’s budget problem as akin to living from paycheck to paycheck. It will get us by, but at the cost of deferring equipment maintenance, home station training and modernization.

The Navy League is concerned that if the Department of the Navy, the Coast Guard and the Maritime Administration are required to continue to respond to crisis after crisis without the funding needed to build new ships, repair old equipment and provide routine maintenance, the nation risks permanent damage to national defense and puts in jeopardy the domestic and international economies that rely on the safety and security that U.S. sea power provides. Ships, crews and equipment cannot continue the current pace of operations. The retention of trained personnel will decline, ultimately leading to reduced readiness for combat and other missions.

By many measures, current funding levels do not meet the sea services’ needs. …

The United States is trying to peacefully bring China into great power status, while Beijing uses diplomatic and economic tools to try and deny the United States physical and political access around the world. China’s defense budget has increased by 500 percent since 2011. Testifying on Feb. 25, 2015, before the House Armed Services Seapower and Projections Forces Subcommittee on the Navy budget, Vice Adm. Joseph P. Mulloy, deputy chief of naval operations for Integration of Capabilities and Resources, said the Chinese navy now has more attack submarines than the United States.

The imperialistic actions of Russia have caught the world off guard, and Moscow’s long-term ambitions are ambiguous at best.

Iran and North Korea represent a risk of nuclear proliferation combined with unpredictable leadership and increased cyber warfare risks.

Iran is expanding its influence and bringing ambiguity to the “nuclear question.” Iran has built up a significant amount of asymmetric offensive capability in the form of small boats, mines and other investments that could disrupt the free flow of goods along the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil transit chokepoint. Al-Qaida, ISIL (the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, also referred to as ISIS) and other transnational networks are now recruiting home-grown violent extremists. They have a brutality unlike anything seen in the modern world, attempting the genocide of the Yazidi people and other horrors.

We have seen cyber attacks on American corporations, such as those on Target and Sony Pictures in 2014, while hackers who are working for nations continue to target the aerospace and defense sectors with increased vigor. Our defense contractors and their intellectual property are prime targets.

The unforeseen threats that we face are the product of a number of factors. For instance, the Arab Spring, the Syria conflict and the withdrawal of forces from Iraq together created the significant unintended consequence of ISIL. The Taliban are regrouping in Afghanistan, and the full impact of their resurgence has yet to be seen. Demand continues to rise. The 2014 Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) demonstrated that the combatant commanders’ (CCDRs’) demand for naval forces has increased, and today it remains very high, particularly when factoring in the following events in 2014:

■ Russia destabilized Crimea and began destabilizing eastern Ukraine in February.

■ ISIL launched an offensive into Iraq in June.

■ The Centers for Disease Control in August predicted 1.4 million people would be infected by Ebola in West Africa.

■ Sony’s networks were hacked in November and December.

Navy officials have testified that a Navy fleet of 450 ships would be needed to fully meet Combatant Command demands. In the face of this increasingly unpredictable global environment, the readiness of U.S. maritime forces is at troublesome levels. Forward-deployed forces are ready to go, but forces that are neither forward nor deployed are not as ready as they have been in the past. The actual deployment of our naval forces has far exceeded the planned deployment schedule as reality and the needs of CCDRs intervened. Extended deployments, deferred maintenance and reduced funding means stress on our services.

In light of this environment, the Navy League of the United States supports five key points:

The Navy, Marine Corps and Coast Guard must:

  1. Maintain the world’s finest maritime force to sustain U.S. global dominance.
  2. Maintain the readiness of the operating forces and avoid hollowing them out.
  3. Make tough budget decisions; everything should be on the table.
  4. Preserve the quality of the all-volunteer force and take care of our Sailors, Marines and Coast Guard men and women.
  5. Be deployed forward as America’s first response to crises around the world.

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s Navy is sinking

The U.S. Navy’s capacity to protect America and insure safety and commerce on the high seas is rapidly sinking.

In 1990, the Navy’s 600 ships guarded the U.S., and  insured international peace as well as orderly global commerce. Today, the aging 250 ship fleet faces major threats from dramatically increased and hostile Russian and Chinese naval forces, as well as regional challenges from Iran. China’s naval force will be larger than the America’s within five years, and both Russia and China have technologies that places even the most powerful U.S. vessels at high risk. In a recent Wall Street Journal interview, Admiral Gary Roughead stated that China “doesn’t want to build a navy that’s equivalent to the U.S., [they] want to build a navy that surpasses the U.S.”

The problem is about to get worse.

According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS)   “The planned size of the Navy, the rate of Navy ship procurement, and the prospective affordability of the Navy’s shipbuilding plans have been matters of concern for the congressional defense committees for the past several years. The Navy’s FY2015 30-year (FY2015-FY2044) shipbuilding plan…does not include enough ships to fully support all elements of the Navy’s 306-ship goal over the entire 30-year period.

“In particular, the Navy projects that the fleet would experience a shortfall in amphibious ships from FY2015 through FY2017, a shortfall in small surface combatants from FY2015 through FY2027, and a shortfall in attack submarines from FY2025 through FY2034…[the] Navy is still recovering from the FY 2013 sequestration in terms of maintenance, training, and deployment lengths. Only 1/3 of Navy contingency response forces are ready to deploy within the required 30 days…

“Unless naval forces are properly sized, modernized at the right pace, ready to deploy with adequate training and equipment, and capable to respond in the numbers and at the speed required by Combatant Commanders, they will not be able to carry out the Nation’s defense strategy as written. We will be compelled to go to fewer places, and do fewer things. Most importantly, when facing major contingencies, our ability to fight and win will neither be quick nor decisive. Unless this Nation envisions a significantly diminished global security role for its military, we must address the growing mismatch in ends, ways, and means. The world is becoming more complex, uncertain, and turbulent. Our adversaries’ capabilities are diversifying and expanding. Naval forces are more important than ever in building global security, projecting power, deterring foes, and rapidly responding to crises that affect our national security.”
It was the first invention of a product it there is no ad behind the product, the MRP of the product will reduced to almost 50 percent female viagra buy lower. These pills are 100% cialis professional online natural i.e. they have been made using the most natural cure for the disease since it works by reducing the amount of carbohydrates in the body, thus resulting in extreme weight loss. A man may be to a great degree well known? There may be various answers however a standout amongst the most fundamental sorts is as this prescription helps various men to encounter a superior sexual coexistence. generika viagra One drug however, effectively targets both of the sexual disorders or dysfunctions such as: Less time erection Problem to maintain the erection Size of the penis don t cialis pills wholesale increase much Pain during erection Irritation No interest in sex or having proper intercourse with his partner.
Mistakes made today will have consequences for decades to come.  Naval vessels cannot be built rapidly, particularly with America’s reduced shipbuilding capacity. As quoted in a recent Breaking Defense article,   “Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 10th, ‘you see the effects today on….our shipyards. You’ll see the effects on our fleet ten years from now, 15 years from now, 20 years from now’…The moral, as Mabus told Senate appropriators, is that ‘if you miss a year building a Navy ship, you never make it up.”

Breaking Defense also quotes Admiral Jonathan Greenert ‘s statement that

“I worry about the shipbuilding industrial base… If sequestration forces steep cuts to the Navy’s shipbuilding account … the impact on the size of the fleet “would take years to manifest,” …  last for decades, so building fewer today generally comes back to bite you in a generation…

“But more importantly,” the admiral went on, “there’s some likelihood we lose one or two [ship] builders, and we only have five. Bath Iron Works in Maine, Electric Boat in Connecticut, Newport News in Virginia, Ingalls in Mississippi, and NASSCO in California: These are the “Big Five,” down from the “Big Six” since the closure of Avondale in Louisiana. (Concentrating the industry even more, Ingalls and Newport belong to Huntington-Ingalls Industries; the other three yards all belong to General Dynamics). Could we really go down to a Big Four or even a Big Three?”

Testifying before Congress in March, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter noted “For decades…U.S. global power projection has relied on the ships, planes, submarines, bases, aircraft carriers, satellites, networks and other advanced capabilities that comprise the military’s technological edge…Today that superiority is being challenged in unprecedented ways.”  Carter also stated that America’s aircraft carrier fleet will probably continue to be reduced in size.