Text Fwd: US Military Chief: Turkey Valued NATO Ally From Korean To Afghan War

StopNATO
US Military Chief: Turkey Valued NATO Ally From Korean To Afghan War

http://www.defenselink.mil//news/newsarticle.aspx?id=55309
U.S. Department of Defense
American Forces Press Service
July 29, 2009

U.S.-Turkish Relationship 'Exceptionally Strong,' Mullen Says
By Gerry J. Gilmore

WASHINGTON - (Editor's note: American Forces Press Service published the
following article June 2, 2009. The original version contained an erroneous
background-information statement that Turkey fought on the side of the Allies in
World War II. In fact, Turkey remained neutral until it declared war on the Axis
on Feb. 23, 1945, shortly before the war ended. The declaration facilitated
Turkey's participation in the Conference on International Organization, from
which the United Nations emerged. We regret the error. Here is a corrected
version of the article.)

WASHINGTON, June 2, 2009 - The United States and the Republic of Turkey remain
steadfast allies and friends in a modern-day relationship that stretches back
decades, the U.S. military's top officer said here yesterday.

The U.S. and Turkish governments worked together during the Cold War to surmount
"some big, big challenges," Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs
of Staff, said during his keynote remarks at the 28th Annual Conference on
U.S.-Turkish Relations dinner held at the Gaylord resort and convention center
at National Harbor, Md.
....
Turkey joined the United Nations after World War II. The then-Soviet Union's
demands to place military bases in the Turkish Straits prompted U.S. President
Harry S. Truman to establish the Truman Doctrine in 1947....Turkey joined NATO
in 1952, and its soldiers fought alongside U.N. troops during the Korean War.

The relationship between the United States and Turkey today is "exceptionally
strong" and "vitally important," Mullen said. Turkey has deployed troops to
Afghanistan as part of Operation Enduring Freedom since 2001.
....
Mullen said the United States in recent years has provided more support to
Turkey in its fight against Kurdistan Workers' Party *terrorists*, known by the
acronym PKK. The PKK wants to establish a socialist, Kurdish state....

The increased American support for Turkey in its battle against the PKK, Mullen
pointed out, has contributed toward a vast improvement of U.S.-Turkish
relations.

Mullen also cited President Barack Obama's early April visit to Turkey's capital
of Ankara, where he addressed the Turkish parliament.
....
Turkey also has good relations with Pakistan, Mullen said, noting that he has
discussed that issue with senior Turkish military leaders, including Gen. Ilker
Basbug, the chief of the Turkish General Staff.

The Pakistani military is currently engaged in an offensive against Taliban
militants that operate in Pakistan's northwestern region near its border with
Afghanistan.
....
===========================
Stop NATO

Text Fwd: U.S. Envoy: Information-Sharing Key to N.Korea Crackdown

* Image source: same as below
'Philip Goldberg'

Chosun Ilbo(South Korea's most conservative right wing newspaper)
U.S. Envoy: Information-Sharing Key to N.Korea Crackdown
VOA News / Jul. 31, 2009 08:08 KST

The U.S. envoy working on enforcing United Nations sanctions against North Korea says sharing information among UN members is key to holding Pyongyang accountable for its banned nuclear activities. Philip Goldberg spoke to reporters Thursday in New York after meeting the UN North Korea sanctions committee.

The UN imposed tough new restrictions on North Korea last month after the reclusive country launched ballistic missiles and conducted its second nuclear test. The sanctions aim to cut off funding for Pyongyang's nuclear, missile and proliferation activities.

Goldberg called the measures "unprecedented," a word he also used to describe China's cooperation in implementing them. He said the U.S. is advising its banks about activities related to North Korean entities. He said he thinks other governments have taken similar positions, and they now have to share that information with each other.

The U.S. State Department says Goldberg will lead a delegation to Moscow on Monday. The delegation will consult with Russian Foreign Ministry and financial officials about enforcing the sanctions. Goldberg also is traveling to undisclosed Asian capitals for similar consultations in mid-August.

Text Fwd: The Significance of Kaesung as the City of Peace

* Image Source

1. Original Photo by Yoo, Young-Ho, 2001, Tongil News
‘A map attached to the Korean War Armistice Agreement, July 27, 1953’ (Name of the places in English added; The author notices the DMZ line-the thick line in the middle- along with the Northern Limited Line(NLL) and Southern Limited Line(SLL) -the both lines along the DMZ- were not drawn in the sea areas during the armistice negotiation period. The arbitrary NLL in the sea areas since then has specially become the controversy and source of conflict.

2. Korea Reports (Feb, 25, 2008)
'[Photo: North Korean workers at the Gaesong industrial complex.]'

Peace Making Issue 141
The Significance of Kaesung as the City of Peace
by Lee, Jae Jung (2009/07/31 05:13)

6. 15 Joint Declaration of South and North Korea enabled a historic city Kaesung [or Kaesong]to develop the industrial complex as a model of national economic development through new South-North cooperation. Due to the Joint Declaration, North Korea was to lease 2000 acres of land for factory, 3000 acres for a supporting town and provide the labour forces as well. South Korea was to invest capital and technology to develop this area and provide electricity for industrial complex to be constructed. In the mean time, two parties agreed to develop a tourist programme to share the historic heritage located in Kaesung along with Keumkangsan area.

In order for these purposes, two parties have enacted necessary laws. Particularly, the North took all the actions for trains from the South to enter its border through the Military Demarcation Line, while the South connected railways and road broken off since the Korean War. The development of Kaesung Industrial Complex and Tourist Programme have played a significant role in loosening military tensions and achieving a model for economic cooperation overcoming political, social and economic differences between two parties. This is a great experiment for peace on Korean Peninsular through economic cooperation and cultural exchange.

The first stage for the Construction of the Industrial Complex started in 2003 was successfully completed in 2007. Since then South Korean companies as well as foreign ones opened their factories there. The first stage of the industrial development is quite successful. Meanwhile tourism to Kaesung started in 2006 which enable South Korean people to enjoy historic heritage and witness the ordinary lives of North Koreans.

However, economic cooperation and cultural exchange between South and North now is in crisis under Lee Myung Bak government. Politically Lee government refuses to agree to mutual agreements of the summits between South and North in former governments. The Lee government fully joined PSI and strengthened economic sanction, which affected Kaesung Industrial Complex adversely. In the meantime North Korea launched a satellite and missiles, and carried out a nuclear experiment. As a result, South-North relation is in real crisis. Tourism to Kaesung and Railway Services between South and Kaesung were stopped and economic activities in the Industrial Complex were decreased drastically.

Kaesung is the city where the Armistice Agreement was signed and belonged to South before the Korean War but now belongs to North since the War, which made Kaesung a symbolic place for division and confrontation between South and North. But Kaesung turned out to be the symbol of peace on the Korean Peninsular through economic cooperation and cultural exchange since 6. 15 Summit Meeting. The role of Kaesung in making peace on the peninsular as well as North East Asia cannot be overestimated. Peace means to recognise and respect differences of others and share common interests based on common purposes. Kaesung has shown the very value of peace and its potentiality to the world.

We can see peace through Kaesung. Peace is possible when Kaesung is open. Both Koreans and World citizens are responsible for developing the experiences of peace in Kaesung further.
--------
* Prof. Lee Jae-Jung Sungkonghoe University, former Minister of Reunification
* resource; 2009 Sungkonghoe University International Symposium[The Role of Inter-City Network for Peace Building in Conflict Areas]

* Related blog

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/07/koreans-declare-727-peace-ship-launch.html
Monday, July 27, 2009
Koreans Declare the “7.27 Peace Ship Launch in the Mouth of Han River” Movement into the New Conversion Movement

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/07/text-fwd-s-korea-fishing-boat-taken-to.html
Friday, July 31, 2009
Text Fwd: S. Korea fishing boat taken to N. Korea port after traveling over the NLL

* Related English articles

http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/korea/kwarmagr072753.html
Text of the Korean War Armistice War Agreement

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_Republic_of_Korea
Constitution of the Republic of Korea

Text Fwd: S. Korea fishing boat taken to N. Korea port after traveling over the NLL

Hankyoreh
S. Korea fishing boat taken to N. Korea port after traveling over the NLL
Observers wait to see if boat’s crew will be repatriated or become a factor in inter-Korean negotiations
Posted on : Jul.31, 2009 12:45 KST

The 29-ton South Korean fishing boat with four crew members crossed the Northern Limit Line (NLL) on Thursday morning as it was catching squid. The fishing boat was brought back to the North Korean port of Jangjon by a North Korean patrol boat. The repatriation of the crew is expected to become a new factor in inter-Korean relations.

Unification Ministry Spokesman Chun Hae-sung said Thursday that at around 6:17 a.m., the 800 Yeonanho, a squid boat from Geojin, Gangwon Province, was on its way home after fishing in international waters in the East Sea when it was intercepted and towed by a North Korean patrol boat some 20 nautical miles northeast of the port of Jejin. The boat was about seven nautical miles across the NLL when it was towed. A military official said the boat left Geojin Harbor at 1:30 p.m. the previous day to catch squid in the distant seas. On its way home, however, it appears its GPS equipment malfunctioned and it entered North Korean waters. The boat entered the North Korean port of Jangjon near the Kumgang Mountains at around 9:30 a.m. Thursday.

A military official said they used a wireless radio to tell the North Korean patrol boat twice that the boat had gone off-course and asked that it be allowed to return south, but there was no response. The South Korean government sent a message through the inter-Korean maritime authority communication net demanding the speedy repatriation of the boat and its crew. North Korea responded in the afternoon via the same communication net, informing South Korean authorities that relevant bodies were currently investigating the incident. The four men on the boat include skipper Park Gwang-seon, chief engineer Kim Yeong-gil, and crewmen Kim Bok-man and Lee Tae-yeol (53).

Since the 2000 inter-Korean summit, North Korea has freed stray South Korean fishing boats that have accidentally crossed the NLL within a couple of days after conducting a brief investigation. In April 2005, for instance, North Korea returned the fishing boat Hwangmanho after its skipper crossed the NLL in a state of severe drunkenness. In December of the same year, the Ujinho was returned in 18 days.


In the case of North Korean boats that wander south, the South Koreans, too, have returned anyone who did not wish to defect. Chun said two North Korean fishing boats crossed the NLL in the West Sea this year, however, both boats were immediately repatriated in the name of humanitarianism, he said.

If North Korea follows these precedents, it will be a positive sign for inter-Korean relations. Observers are saying if North Korea treats this incident, the first of a South Korean fishing boat crossing the NLL since the Lee Myung-bak administration took office, similar to how it has in the past by applying the principle of repatriation, it could signal that North Korea does not want to further aggravate its relationship with South Korea.

Observers are adding, however, that the crew’s repatriation could be delayed if North Korea intends to negotiate or apply pressure by drawing out the length of the investigation. It the crew becomes a negotiating card with South Korea, one could see this incident as opening another channel in the currently blocked-up inter-Korean relationship. On the other hand, if North Koreas uses the crew to apply pressure on South Korea, it would mean it now has another “hostage” card to play, in addition to the currently detained Hyundai Asan employee who had been working in Kaesong (Gaseong) and negatively effect inter-Korean relations.

Please direct questions or comments to [englishhani@hani.co.kr]


© 2006 The Hankyoreh Media Company. All rights reserved.

* Related blogs
Korean War Armistice Agreement

Text fwd: [No Bases: On Status Of the Forces Agreement, Korea] Query re immunity of troops on bases

* Image Source: Anti US Base(Korean)

For more photo sources regarding the USFK Crimes in Korea in the same site above

Below is the quotation from the E mail from Youkyoung Ko to the No bases on July 31, 2009


'Dear John

This is youkyoung from Korea.

I attached some materials.[Linked]
Could you tell me about service members' status in Colombia now without their bases and installation. I think there was the agreement about US service members and civilians' status regarding criminal. And that agreement should affect the negotiation.

In Korea case, roughly speaking, US have tried to evade their service member's standing in Korea court. They delayed intentionally the negotiation of SOFA after 1953 when the mutual defense agreement between ROK and US was signed and US forces stationed in peninsula by that until 1966. After the negotiation for revising SOFA began in Nov. 1995, US broke off over the transom in Sep 1996. In Aug 2000 the negotiation resumed and in Dec 2000 ROK and US reached the revision.

Before the US and ROK sat the table, there were always incidents, criminals, victims, people's struggles.

Last year my organization published a book in celebration of the 15th anniversary.
I wrote the history of US forces crimes and people' struggles in the book.
I think it would be helpful but we have only Korean version.
If someone want to translate the article to English, please refer to this site. http://antiusbase.tistory.com/

I could not translate correctly the name of charges and legal words in the file "Statistics-1967-2007".
It is not clear so it would be just reference.
The attached file "The history of Criminal Jurisdiction on US service members in ROK" is the information of the agreements.

This articles may be helpful.

1. Understanding the United States through the Crimes Committed by its Troops in Korea
http://blog.peoplepower21.org/English/8504

2. The Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Korea Reasons for Revision
http://blog.peoplepower21.org/English/8503

3. Forbidden Rights to Pollute the Korean Peninsula
http://blog.peoplepower21.org/English/8505

Hope this help,
You Kyoung, Ko'

* You Kyoung Ko is the director of the "The National Campaign for Eradication of Crimes by U.S.Troops in Korea"[ Check Emglish on the top right"]

* Status Of Forces Agreement


2009/ 7/23 John Lindsay-Poland

Friends, activists, researchers,

As you may know, the governments of Colombia and the United States are currently negotiating the presence of five military bases in Colombia. On of the issues being debated is that of immunity for U.S. uniformed soldiers as well as civilian contractors. The question that has come up is [whether] there are other countries in the world where U.S. soldiers or civilian personnel contracted by the US military who do NOT have legal immunity for crimes committed in the ‘host nation’s territory.

If you have information about this, could you please contact me?

For further information on the current negotiations for bases in Colombia, see
Revamping Plan Colombia
http://fpif.org/fpiftxt/6283

Many thanks.

John Lindsay-Poland


--
Fellowship of Reconciliation
Task Force on Latin America and the Caribbean
Please note new address
PO Box 72492
436 14th St. #409, Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: 510-763-1403 Fax: 510-763-1409
Web: http://www.forcolombia.org
http://www.forusa.org

Video Fwd: Talisman Sabre protests

* Informed by Hannah Midleton on July 31, 2009

'A video report from the Peace Convergence at Operation Talisman Sabre, the joint military exercise involving thousands of US and Australian troops, in central Queensland. Action depicted all took place on July 11 and 12, around the towns of Yeppoon and Rockhampton. Editing and additional camerawork by Annabel McGoldrick:

http://www.transcend.org/tms/video_details.php

Or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sMsniEwA3o'

Text fwd: Pushing South Asia Toward the Brink

Text Informed by Bruce Gagnon on July 30, 2009

Foreign Policy In Focus
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/6295
Pushing South Asia Toward the Brink
By Zia Mian | July 27, 2009


The contradictions and confusions in U.S. policy in South Asia were
on full display during Secretary of State Hilary Clinton's recent
visit to India. U.S. support for India, which centers on making
money, selling weapons, and turning a blind eye to the country's
nuclear weapons, is fatally at odds with U.S. policy and concerns
about Pakistan.

By enabling an India-Pakistan arms race, rather than focusing on
resolving the conflict and helping them make peace, the United States
is driving Pakistan toward the very collapse it fears.

America's New India

In an op-ed in The Times of India just before the start of her visit,
Clinton laid out U.S. interests in India. The first item on Clinton's
list was "the 300 million members of India's burgeoning middle
class," that she identified as "a vast new market and opportunity."

The emerging Indian middle class is large - for comparison, the
current total U.S. population is also about 300 million - and greedy
for a more American lifestyle. But the focus on India as
fundamentally a market for U.S. goods and services, and a source of
cheap labor for U.S. corporations, marks a remarkable shift. The
United States and other western countries have traditionally seen
India as the home of the desperately poor, deserving charity and
needing development. But no more. Clinton's article made no mention
of India's poor, which the World Bank recently estimated as including
over 450 million people living on less than $1.25 a day.

India is also seen as a new emerging power of the 21st century, one
that can be an ally of the United States and help it balance and
contain the rise of China. Under the Bush Administration, in 2004,
the U.S. and India signed an agreement called the "Next Steps in
Strategic Partnership." To make India a fitting strategic partner, a
senior State Department official later explained the U.S."goal is to
help India become a major world power in the 21st century," and left
no doubt what this meant, saying "we understand fully the
implications, including military implications, of that statement."

India is seeking both to modernize and expand its military forces. It
has dramatically increased its military budget, up over 34% alone
this year. India now has the 10th-highest military spending in the
world. It's becoming a major market for U.S. arms sales. U.S. weapons
makers Lockheed Martin and Boeing have already racked up deals worth
billions of dollars. But the real bonanza is still to come. India is
said to be planning to spend as much $55 billion on weapons over the
next five years.

But the big news of the Clinton visit was the announcement of an
India-U.S. Strategic Dialogue. This will include an annual formal
meeting of key officials, co-chaired by the secretary of State and
India's external affairs minister, and including on the U.S. side the
secretaries of Agriculture, Trade, Energy, Education, Finance, Health
and Human Services, Homeland Security, and others. But given the
difference in the power and range of interests of the two states,
this will be no dialogue of equals. The process is intended to align
Indian interests and policies in a wide range of areas with those of
the United States.

Nuclear India

In her press conference with India's minister of external affairs,
Clinton said, "We discussed our common vision of a world without
nuclear weapons and the practical steps that our countries can take
to strengthen the goal of nonproliferation." But there was no mention
here of India's nuclear buildup, or of the United States asking India
to slow down or to end its program. In fact, one would never guess
from Clinton's remarks that India even had a nuclear weapons program.
She seemed interested only in the prospect of U.S. sales of nuclear
reactors to India worth $10 billion or more.

India is one of perhaps only three countries still making material
for new nuclear weapons. The others are Pakistan and Israel (with
North Korea threatening to resume production). India is building a
fast-breeder reactor that is expected to begin operation in 2010 and
is outside International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards. It could
increase three- to five-fold India's current capacity to make
plutonium for nuclear weapons.

India seeks to become a major nuclear power. On July 26, it launched
its first nuclear-powered submarine. India plans to deploy several of
these submarines. Last year, it carried out its first successful
underwater launch of a 700 kilometer-range ballistic missile,
Sagarika, intended for the submarine. India joins the United States,
Russia, the United Kingdom, France, and China in the club of those
owning such nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered submarines. Israel is
believed to have nuclear-armed cruise missiles on diesel powered
submarines.

India is also developing an array of land-based missiles. In May
2008, it tested the 3,500 kilometer-range Agni-III missile, which was
subsequently reported to have been approved for deployment with the
army, and is working on a missile with a range of over 5,000
kilometer. In November 2008, India also tested a 600 kilometer-range
silo-based missile, Shourya. In 2009, India carried out several tests
of its cruise missile, Brahmos, which the army and navy are inducting
into service.

The U.S. silence on India's nuclear weapons and missile programs is
all the more telling, given that it was the Clinton administration
that proposed United Nations Security Council resolution 1172. In
1998, this unanimous Security Council resolution called on India and
Pakistan to "immediately stop their nuclear weapon development
programs, to refrain from the deployment of nuclear weapons, to cease
development of ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear
weapons, and any further production of fissile material for nuclear
weapons." The Bush administration ignored it. It seems the Obama
administration will too.

Pakistan v. India

Pakistan was noticeable for its near absence from Clinton's agenda in
India. It came up only in the context of the need to fight terrorism.
Forgotten was the brute fact that India and Pakistan are straining
harder than ever in their nuclear and conventional arms race. A
Pakistani diplomat responded to the Clinton visit to India by telling
The Washington Post that "What Hillary is doing there is probably
again going to start an arms race." This race drives Pakistan toward
collapse, the very thing the United States fears.

Pakistan is buying U.S. weapons as fast as it can, some paid for with
U.S. military aid, with arms sales agreements worth over $6 billion
since 2001, including for new F-16 jet-fighters. China, an old ally,
is also supplying the country with jet fighters and other weapons.
Pakistan is also boosting its nuclear program. It's building two new
reactors to make plutonium for nuclear weapons. It continues to test
both ballistic missiles and cruise missiles to carry nuclear weapons.

The principal U.S. concern about Pakistan, aside from the country
falling apart and its nuclear weapons falling into the hands of
Islamists, is the war against al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan
and in the border areas of Pakistan. It has been telling Pakistan to
focus its military forces and strategic concerns on this battle,
which requires moving more soldiers away from the border with India.
The generals who command Pakistan's army were bound to resist such a
redeployment. They worry about the new U.S.-India strategic
relationship, and what it may mean for them when the war on the
Taliban is over and the United States no longer needs Pakistan.

The Pakistani army, which rules the country even when civilians are
in office, will not easily shift its view of India. The army and
those who lead it see the threat from India as their very reason for
being. The army has grown in size, influence, and power, to the point
where it dwarfs all other institutions in society and would lose much
if there was peace with India. But there is a personal dimension as
well. The partition of the subcontinent 62 years ago that created
Pakistan is in the living memory of many who make decisions in
Pakistan. General Pervez Musharraf, who was chief of army staff
before he seized power in 1999 and ruled for nine years, was born in
India before partition. General Musharraf, along with the current
chief of army staff, General Kayani, and others in Pakistan's high
command, fought as young officers in the 1971 war against India. The
war ended with Pakistan itself partitioned, as East Pakistan became
the independent state of Bangladesh, with India's help, and 90,000
Pakistani soldiers captured by India as prisoners of war.

As Graham Usher notes in the new issue of the Middle East Report,
before becoming president, Barack Obama seemed to understand that
resolving the conflict between India and Pakistan was critical to
dealing with the problems in Afghanistan and with the Taliban. In
2007, Obama claimed "I will encourage dialogue between Pakistan and
India to work toward resolving their dispute over Kashmir and between
Afghanistan and Pakistan to resolve their historic differences and
develop the Pashtun border region. If Pakistan can look toward the
east with greater confidence, it will be less likely to believe that
its interests are best advanced through cooperation with the
Taliban." There is little evidence that this view has yet informed
U.S. policy.

The Reality of Pakistan

In their rush to make money and to preserve American power in the
world by crafting an alliance with India, U.S. policymakers seem to
have averted their eyes from the reality that stares them in the face
in Pakistan. In March 2009, the Director of National Intelligence
summed up the situation in Pakistan:

The government is losing authority in parts of the North-West
Frontier Province and has less control of its semi-autonomous tribal
areas: even in the more developed parts of the country, mounting
economic hardships and frustration over poor governance have given
rise to greater radicalization.Economic hardships are intense, and
the country is now facing a major balance of payments challenge.
Islamabad needs to make painful reforms to improve overall
macroeconomic stability. Pakistan's law-and-order situation is
dismal, affecting even Pakistani elites, and violence between various
sectarian, ethnic, and political groups threatens to escalate.
Pakistan's population is growing rapidly at a rate of about 2 percent
a year, and roughly half of the country's 172 million residents are
illiterate, under the age of 20, and live near or below the poverty
line.

Things have worsened since then. The Taliban is now seeking to escape
U.S. drone attacks and major assaults by the Pakistan army in the
Tribal Areas by taking refuge in the cities. There are already no-go
areas in Karachi, Pakistan's largest city, where the Taliban controls
the streets. Meanwhile electricity riots have exploded in cities
across the country, with mobs attacking public buildings, blocking
highways, and damaging trains and buses. Each day seems to bring news
of some new failure of the state to provide basic social services.

The Obama administration believes that an increase in U.S. aid to
Pakistan can help solve the problem. The Kerry-Lugar bill (the
Enhanced Partnership with Pakistan Act) approved by the Senate in
June would triple economic aid to Pakistan to $1.5 billion a year for
five years. But as the Congressional Research Service noted in its
recent report on Pakistan, the United States has given Pakistan about
$16.5 billion in "direct, overt U.S. aid" up to 2007. More of the
same offers little hope for change.

A basic reordering of U.S. priorities in South Asia is long overdue.
The first principle of U.S. policy in the region should be to do no
more harm. This means it has to stop feeding the fire between India
and Pakistan. Only an end to the South Asian arms race can begin to
undo the structures of fear, hostility, and violence that have
sustained the conflict in the subcontinent for so long. The search
for peace may then have at least a chance of success.


Zia Mian is a physicist with the Program on Science and Global
Security at the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International
Affairs at Princeton University and a columnist for Foreign Policy In
Focus.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)

Video fwd: GOOD OVERVIEW OF OBAMA FOREIGN POLICY

Bruce Gagnon blog
Wednesday, July 29, 2009
GOOD OVERVIEW OF OBAMA FOREIGN POLICY

Text Fwd: Will drones push fighter pilots out of the cockpit?

* Informed by Bruce Gagnon on July 29, 2009

* Image Source
1. Airman 1st Class Caleb Force, a Predator sensor operator, helps 1st Lt. Jorden Smith, a Predator pilot, locate simulated targets during an MQ-1 Predator training mission at Creech Air Force Base in Nevada. (Nadine Y. Barclay / Air Force)

2. Air Force Maj. Bryan Dresser does a pre-flight check on an A-10 Thunderbolt II before takeoff at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base. (Jill Torrance / Arizona Daily Star)

3. The MQ-1 Predator is among the unmanned aircraft, or drones, that some see as the future of the Air Force. (Leslie Pratt / Air Force)

The Arizona Daily Star
07.26.2009
Will drones push fighter pilots out of the cockpit? Fliers face future where planes work by remote control By Carol Ann Alaimo ARIZONA DAILY STAR

For as long as Col. Paul Johnson has been in the cockpit, the fighter pilot has been an icon of American military might.

Now, after nearly a quarter century in uniform, he's witnessing the beginning of the end of that era.

Increasingly, the U.S Air Force is turning to unmanned aircraft to perform work once done exclusively by aviators like Johnson, the wing commander of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base.

At the highest levels of the Pentagon, plans are under way to reduce the role of warplanes, and rely more heavily on remotely piloted craft.

"This is massive," said Johnson, an A-10 pilot with more than 2,000 hours in the skies, describing the potential changes ahead.

"It's a head-exploding topic," he said. But "for us to sit on the sidelines and ignore this new technology would be irresponsible."

In the space of a generation or two, officials say, Air Force bases like D-M could be doing much of their business by remote control, reducing jet noise over urban areas while saving money, improving effectiveness and preventing risk to the lives of military personnel.

How much of the service's work can be done by drones is the subject of intense research and debate in Washington, and there are many unknowns about how quickly such technology will advance.
Already, though, some are envisioning the end of the Air Force as we know it.

Peter Singer, director of the 21st Century Defense Initiative at the Brookings Institution, one of Washington's oldest and most respected think tanks, predicts a vast array of missions for unmanned craft, from stealth bombing to electronic warfare — even dogfights.

"It's not just intelligence and bomber pilots who will be replaced with machines," said a recent article by Singer, a campaign adviser on defense policy to President Obama.

"Planning is proceeding on UCAVs, unmanned combat aerial vehicles, which will replace fighter jocks, too."

Last manned fighter?

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is among those gazing into the future.

In a May appearance before the Senate Armed Service Committee, Gates suggested that the Joint Strike Fighter or JSF — the warplane due to replace the A-10 attack jets flown at D-M — could be America's last manned fighter.

"We're at a real time of transition here in terms of the future of aviation," Gates told senators, according to a transcript.

"The whole issue of what's going to be manned, what's going to be unmanned, what's going to be stealthy, what isn't, how do we address these threats … it's changing," he said.

"There are those that see JSF as the last manned fighter, or fighter-bomber, or jet. And I'm one of — you know, I'm one that's inclined to believe that. I don't know if that's exactly right. But this all speaks to the change."

This year, for the first time in history, the Air Force expects to train more unmanned aerial vehicle pilots — 240 — than conventional fighter-bomber pilots — 214.
Col. Eric Mathewson, head of the Air Force's unmanned aircraft task force at the Pentagon, said the service plans to examine all its missions to see which can be adapted for unmanned flight.

He doesn't picture pilots going away completely — at least, not anytime soon. But he can't predict what's ahead, he said, because UAV technology is still in its infancy.
"You can't judge UAVs by what you see today. That would be like judging all aircraft by looking at the Wright Flyer," Mathewson said, referring to the first powered plane, built by the Wright brothers in 1903.

"Phenomenal" performers

UAVs have been used in various forms since the Civil War but were limited by low technology. They didn't come into heavy use until recently in Iraq and Afghanistan, and their stellar showing there is a big part of what's driving the current push to find other uses.

The most common Air Force UAVs — the Predator, and its supercharged sibling, the Reaper — are armed with Hellfire missiles. They're used for reconnaissance and surveillance and can carry out strikes against smaller targets.

Col. Trey Turner, a former Navy F-14 pilot who now oversees Air Force UAV training at the Pentagon, said the Predator and the Reaper are "phenomenal" performers in counterinsurgency work.
Even in their infancy, they outshine piloted aircraft for some tasks, Turner said.

A manned jet, for example, typically needs refueling after an hour or so, and human pilots need rest breaks.

A UAV never tires. It can stay aloft for 18 hours or more, staring at hot spots and attacking insurgents caught on camera planting roadside bombs or hauling weapons. And at the end of a shift the mission can be handed off to another UAV, allowing for 24/7 coverage.

Live video feed from UAV cameras is beamed to commanders on the ground and around the world because they typically are flown via satellite link by operators stationed in the United States.

D-M has been home to a Predator unit since 2007. The Air National Guard's 214th Reconnaissance Group now flies missions around the clock in Iraq and Afghanistan from its quarters at the Tucson base.
In perhaps a sign of how high demand is, 214th personnel were too busy flying Predators to be interviewed for this story.

To meet soaring requests for the Predator's services overseas, the Air Force is funneling hundreds of young pilots straight out of flight school into UAV units. The service also is training officers who aren't pilots to fly UAVs and is looking at allowing non-officers to fly some of them.

Finding enough UAV operators may be challenging since the job doesn't have the allure of manned flight, said analyst Lawrence Korb, a former assistant defense secretary who oversaw military manpower and reserve affairs during the Reagan era.

"To fly a plane twice the speed of sound and come in for attack with missiles flying, there's a certain amount of glamour to that," said Korb, now a senior fellow with the Center for American Progress, another Washington think tank.

"There's not much glamour to sitting in Arizona or Nevada pushing buttons, even though it's just as important."

Less noise, pollution

Mathewson, a former F-15 pilot, said one factor that's come up in Pentagon discussions is the possibility of reduced environmental impact — less aircraft noise, less need for jet fuel and other military pollutants — at U.S. bases where pilots train to fly by remote control.

Some snags must be ironed out, though, before UAVs could take to American skies in areas where civilian airliners fly.

The Federal Aviation Administration, for example, has resisted the idea, concerned that public safety might be compromised without human pilots on board.

It's too early to say what impact more UAVs could have on the future need for Air Force bases and personnel, or how much money might be saved, Mathewson said.

Today's UAVs cost far less than manned fighters — $5 million for a Predator compared to $85 million for a Joint Strike Fighter — but they don't have anywhere near the same capabilities. Future UAVs may have much higher price tags as they become more advanced, he said.

As unmanned aircraft mature, certain jobs now handled by humans — bomb loading, ground refueling, some basic flight-line maintenance — could be automated. And, eventually, UAV operators may be able to fly many unmanned craft at once for certain types of missions.

"That's where you would see some savings," he said.

Mathewson couldn't say whether D-M might be a future candidate for more UAVs. But a military consultant who has advised Tucson City Hall thinks it would make sense.

"If you look 20 years into the future, they could be based out of D-M," said Eugene Santarelli, a retired Air Force lieutenant general and former D-M wing commander. "With the geographic location of D-M and the (Barry M.) Goldwater range nearby, it could be a good fit."

As the future unfolds, pilots like D-M's commander will be watching and pondering the implications — both practical and ethical.

"This is not just a discussion about air systems. It's a discussion about the nature of war," said D-M wing commander Johnson, noting that other branches of the military also are pursuing unmanned technology.

"Are we moving toward a battle space devoid of human beings? And, if so, how will that impact a nation's willingness or reluctance to wage war?

"While we are having these technological developments, we can't be afraid to couch them in some larger philosophical discussions about what war is, and what war will be."


Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)

Text Fwd: TRIP WIRE FOR WAR

Bruce Gagnon blog
Wednesday, July 29, 2009 TRIP WIRE FOR WAR

It's hot, it's muggy, it's been raining, and folks are treating me wonderfully. I've been in Kyoto for two days with little Internet connection. The first two nights I stayed in a traditional wooden Japanese home where I slept on a futon on the floor - Japanese style. But sadly their wireless connection didn't work so I've had to move to a hotel where I will spend the next two nights. I get hundreds of emails each day and find it impossible to be without Internet for long. A friend in California calls my laptop my "altar."

I've been taken to a couple local wonderful spots including the Kiyomizu Dera Temple that overlooks the city from the base of a surrounding mountain. Just a spectacular place. Kyoto is famous for many temples and the city is crawling with tourists from all over the world.

Last night I spoke to 70 people and after I talked a 3rd generation Japanese-born man of Korean ancestry spoke. I was surprised to learn that even when Koreans are born in Japan they do not automatically get citizenship. There is still discrimination here against Koreans, many of whom were brought to Japan during imperial times as virtual slave labor. Lee Tong Il spoke out in favor of North Korea's right to defend themselves from an aggressive US and Japan. He said, "For 60 years the US has brought nuclear weapons to the Korean Peninsula so North Korea has to have nuclear weapons to defend themselves."

While I am opposed to all countries having nukes I must agree with his basic point that the US position is hypocritical because our nation has more nuclear weapons than any other country and we continually test them. (August 23 is the next planned US Minuteman nuclear missile test fired from Vandenberg AFB in California that will land at Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific.) North Korea sees Iraq and Afghanistan get invaded, Iran threatened, and they figure their only chance for survival as a nation is to arm themselves as well.

The big issue in Japan right now is whether or not the government should get rid of Article 9 of their Constitution that says they will not have an offensive military. Prior to WW II Japan invaded Manchuria and occupied Korea. Their colonial empire spread throughout the Pacific Region. The right-wing in Japan wants to get rid of Article 9 and is even calling for preemptive attack on North Korea. This stirs fears in the region about a resuscitated imperial Japan, coupled with a massively armed imperial US, a clear prescription for disaster.

A key part of all this current trouble is the US "missile defense" program which is now being deployed in Japan, South Korea, Australia, and on Navy Aegis destroyers surrounding China. After my talk last night several people thanked me for my clear explanation how the US "missile defense" program is really part of a broader offensive first-strike attack program - the sword and the shield together.

Bottom line is that the region is a trip wire for war. Thank goodness that there is an active and strong peace movement here.

* Related blogs

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/07/walking-kyoto.html
Thursday, July 30, 2009
WALKING KYOTO

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/07/satomi-still-lives.html
Sunday, July 26, 2009
SATOMI STILL LIVES

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/07/tough-talk-about-korea.html
Saturday, July 25, 2009
TOUGH TALK ABOUT KOREA

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/07/talking-space.html
Thursday, July 23, 2009
TALKING SPACE IN TOKYO