US, Russia Extend Threat Reduction Pact

(Source: White House Press Office; issued June 19, 2006)

WASHINGTON --- The following is a statement by the White House Press Secretary:

The United States and Russia have signed a Protocol to extend for another seven year period the U.S.-Russia Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Umbrella Agreement. The Agreement was concluded in 1992 under the leadership of President George H. W. Bush and Senators Lugar and Nunn, and first extended in 1999.

CTR programs are a key tool used to deal with one of the gravest threats we face -- the danger that terrorists and proliferators could gain access to weapons or materials of mass destruction. Under the CTR programs, thousands of missiles and warheads have been deactivated.

The CTR program is also assisting efforts to complete upgrades to Russian nuclear warhead sites in accordance with the Bratislava Nuclear Security Cooperation initiative announced by the President and President Putin last year. By working to secure, eliminate, and account for weapons and materials of mass destruction, CTR programs support the President's National Security Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction.

In addition to CTR work in Russia, CTR programs have assisted Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine to become free of nuclear weapons and strategic delivery systems, and helped many states to prevent the proliferation of sensitive materials.

-ends-

US Urges Russia to Drop Arms Deal with Venezuela

(Source: Voice of America news; issued July 25, 2006)

The United States Tuesday again urged the Russian government to reconsider a $1 billion military aircraft sale to Venezuela. U.S. officials say Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez' weapons plans exceed the country's defensive needs.

The U.S. appeal came as Mr. Chavez arrived in Moscow for a visit expected to include the signing of several weapons deals, among them the $1 billion purchase of 30 Sukhoi SU-30 jets and a like number of military helicopters.

The SU-30 is a long-range multi-role fighter jet and would be a major upgrade over aging U.S.-supplied F-16 aircraft that have been the mainstay of the Venezuelan air force.

At a news briefing, State Department Deputy Spokesman Tom Casey said the United States has raised its concerns with Moscow over the proposed sale, which he said would be in the best interests of neither Russia nor Venezuela.

"We repeatedly talked to the Russian government that the arms purchases planned by Venezuela exceeded its defensive needs, and are not helpful in terms of regional stability," said Mr. Casey. "Certainly, given the fact that this aircraft costs between $30 million and $45 million each, depending which model you're talking about, kind of raises some questions about Venezuela's priorities."

The spokesman did not say if the United States would make a last-minute diplomatic appeal to Russian authorities over the pending sale. But he said the Bush administration has had a number of discussions with Moscow about the issue and will probably have more.

The United States has accused Mr. Chavez, a left-leaning populist, of curbing democratic freedoms at home and meddling in affairs of neighboring states.

The Venezuelan leader has alleged a U.S. role in a military coup that briefly unseated him in 2002, and says he needs new weapons, including 100,000 Russian assault rifles, because of alleged U.S. invasion plans.

Mr. Chavez arrived in Russia from neighboring Belarus, where he held talks with President Alexander Lukashenko, who has also been a target of U.S. criticism because of his authoritarian governing style. (ends)

To hell with Russia. Or Putin. Maybe he wont fix the next election, the bastard.

Venezuela trying to build some pact against the US is, in my opinion, a threat, and damn near an act of war.

I agree with KoRnAdvocate. Never trust the Russians. When we Finns trusted them, they just waited until the moment was right and attacked us.

While I would like to believe that Russia is slowly coming around to shaking its Cold War paranoia, these latest actions...(and in particular their relationship with Iran)...seems to indicate otherwise.

Russia, Venezuela Sign Huge Deal for Warplanes, Helicopters

(Source: Voice of America news; issued July 27, 2006)

The head of Russia's state arms trading agency says Russia has signed contracts to sell Venezuela 24 jet fighter planes and 53 military helicopters.

Details of the deal were not immediately clear. But the head of Russia's arms export agency said the two countries have signed contracts for Venezuelan purchase of some $3 billion worth of military equipment over the last 18 months.

His comments came as Russian President Vladimir Putin and Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez met in Moscow.

The newly acquired Russian fighter planes are expected to replace a fleet of U.S.-made F-16 fighter jets. Venezuelan authorities say they have not been able to buy spare parts for the F-16s since Washington imposed an arms embargo on Venezuela earlier this year.

Mr. Putin said Thursday the contracts are not directed against other states. He said they are aimed at developing the economies of the two countries.

-ends-

Schlappy, any word on the current state of the Venezuelan Navy? Fighter jets are one thing, but if they don't have a fleet to threaten commercial shipping or the american navy, then they are pretty much a bunch of junk talkers with no capability of action.

Only this...


Venezuela Signs $199M Agreement With Spanish Firm for 31 Patrol Boats

Defense Industry Daily
24-Jul-2006
link

DID has covered Navantia's potential billion dollar sale of corvettes/OPVs to Venezuela, which appears to be going ahead. In addition, reader Pedro Lucio tips us to an additional deal with Spanish firm Rodman Polyships for 31 patrol boats, at a price of EUR 157 million. DID prefers the figure of USD $199 million, as it comes from the Venezuelan government mouthpiece El Universal; that article also notes that the foundations for the deal were laid during an October 2005 visit by Hugo Chavez.

The boats will reportedly be 30, 20 and 17 meters long (approx. 100, 75, and 55 feet). In order to avoid the US ITAR arms export regulations that appear to have killed the deal for EADS-CASA aircraft, they will reportedly use European and Japanese navigation and communication equipment that does not fall under such regulations.

--------------------------------------

Navantia Begins Work on 8 Venezuelan Patrol Boats

Defense Industry Daily
01-Jun-2006
link

On November 28, 2005, Navantia and the Navy of Venezuela signed a contract for the construction of eight patrol vessels for a total amount of more than EUR 1.2 billion: 4 coastal patrol vessels and 4 larger "Economic Area Vessels." Venezuela's increasingly aggressive regional policies and arms buildup triggered US efforts to block the transfer of American technologies, and left Navantia very careful not to refer to the larger vessels with a military name like 'corvettes.' While the corresponding deal for CASA's air transports and maritime surveillance aircraft appears to have been shot down, workaround have evidently been found for the larger naval deal and it is going ahead. On May 26, 2006, Venezuela and Navantia formally signed off and construction of the eight vessels can now begin.

Oil-rich Russia is getting stronger

Column by Thomas Fedyszyn
July 25, 2006
link

The recent Group of 8 (G8) summit in St. Petersburg let Russian President Vladimir Putin show a beautiful city to world leaders. More important, it let him show a new and reinvigorated Russian foreign policy - one no longer subservient to Western economic or military strength.

Russia has been an enigma to American policymakers for nearly a century, sometimes viewed as a mirror-imaged soul mate, sometimes as a mortal enemy. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and the 1990s implosion of the Russian economy, it mattered little which view America took. Today, however, things are different.

As the world's leading energy exporter, Russia has seen its fortunes wax over the last several years, particularly since the American-led invasion of Iraq. The recent surge in oil prices, provoked by U.S. foes in Iran and North Korea, can only delight the Russian president. So though Russia may not yet deserve its membership in the exclusive G8 club, Moscow has adopted an air of self-assurance not seen since the Cold War.

On the positive side, the influx of petrodollars has let Russia continue its movement to fully joining the world's economy. For example, its new wealth enabled Moscow to render the ruble a fully convertible currency, thereby making Russian enterprises much more attractive to foreign capital.

Conversely, Russia's petrodollars support a more aggressive arms-export policy, represented by the recent sale of jet-fighter aircraft and small arms to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

Additionally, for the first time in decades, Russian and Chinese troops last fall conducted military operations together. They did so under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an Asian group aimed at balancing American influence in the region.

In other moves contrary to U.S. wishes, Putin has tightened his control of the Russian media, muzzled domestic critics and otherwise consolidated his power.

Perhaps the most unsettling outcome of Russia's new hubris is its position on international terrorism.

In apparent response to insurgents' recent executions of four Russian diplomats in Baghdad by al-Qaida-linked terrorists - for which the Russian parliament blamed the United States - Putin asked his Federation Council to rubber-stamp the use of security forces outside Russia, in an antiterrorist offensive. Russia already has troops deployed in neighboring Georgia, partly in support of separatists and partly because Moscow thinks Georgia has done too little to thwart Chechen guerrillas. Tensions between Russia and Georgia are rising and could easily result in armed conflict.

Georgia's decision to side with NATO and the United States on important security and economic issues has also upset Russia. Similar issues played out in the Baltics a decade ago. Then, Russia threatened but ultimately backed down as Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia joined the Western alliance. However, that was the impoverished and insecure Russia of the 1990s.

Today, Russia is much less likely to accede to the whims of a former satellite in the "near abroad." Under the cover of fighting international terrorism, Russia may plan to militarily engage a recalcitrant neighbor, notwithstanding President Bush's recent praise for Georgia's "Rose Revolution."

Russia knows that playing the energy card too aggressively will meet with G8 resistance, such as that shown last fall when Russia tried to blackmail Ukraine.

However, world leaders must brace themselves to deal with a rich, confident Russia, which will no longer acquiesce in Western security or economic demands.

Whether genuine or just another Potemkin Village, every move by Putin is a sign that he will act as if Russia has returned to center stage. As this brings Russia into the world economy, so much the better; as it fuels the flames of Russian nationalism and unilateral adventurism, beware.

Thomas Fedyszyn, a retired U.S. Navy captain, is a professor of national-security affairs at the U.S. Naval War College. In 1998-2000, he was chief of Russian and Ukrainian affairs at NATO, and in 1996-98 he was naval attache at the U.S. Embassy in Moscow. The views here are his own and do not necessarily reflect those of the War College or any other U.S. agency.

quote:

Originally posted by Minoso:
I agree with KoRnAdvocate. Never trust the Russians. When we Finns trusted them, they just waited until the moment was right and attacked us.

And some of the arse kickin's you gave them in various battles are some of the greatest victories in history!

Can't believe we're even considering this in the first place.


Time To Give Up on Missile Defense Cooperation With Russia

Aviation Week & Space Technology
by Richard Weitz
08/07/2006


Russia's senior military officer has just published an article denouncing U.S. ballistic missile defense (BMD) plans. The authoritative nature of the critique by Gen. Yurii Baluyevskiy, chief of the Russian General Staff, is evident in the decision to publish the text under his own name in Russia's leading defense weekly, Voenno-Promishlenniy Kur'er. Among other points, Baluyevskiy accuses U.S. officials of seeking strategic supremacy by negating the nuclear deterrents of both Russia and China.

In theory, BMD represents a potential area of cooperation between both Russia and the U.S., and Russia and NATO. Bilateral Russian-U.S. BMD collaboration has mostly concerned national missile defense (NMD), primarily against long-range ballistic missiles. Russia's work with NATO has focused on theater-wide missile defense (TMD) systems designed to intercept short- and medium-range missiles.

Since the early '90s, Russian and U.S. officials have discussed possible bilateral BMD cooperation. Russian aerospace, defense and other companies have evinced a long-standing interest in such cooperation--and have persistently overestimated U.S. interest in their potential contributions. Russian analysts argue that Russia's proximity to states of proliferation concern and their country's vast experience with BMD technologies should give it a central role in a global NMD framework. Also, Moscow is now defended by the world's most extensive operational BMD system. The Russian government keeps upgrading the Moscow system, which uses interceptor missiles equipped with nuclear warheads. It also has begun constructing new early-warning radars capable of detecting long-range strategic ballistic and short-range missiles, including cruise weapons.

Russian officials have long hoped that NATO countries would purchase Russian TMD technologies and weapons systems. In 2003, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Kislyak said that Russians "have our own anti-missile systems that might be useful, and they are among the world's best . . . we are very serious partners." In 2005, Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov offered to contribute the S-300 and forthcoming S-400 air defense systems to a future European TMD system, including one directed against the growing threat of cruise missiles. The S-400 (designated SA-20 by NATO) is an advanced surface-to-air missile system designed to destroy aircraft, cruise missiles, and short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with high explosives at ranges of up to 400 km. (250 mi.).

Recurring disagreements between Russian and Western officials over the nature of the ballistic missile threat have repeatedly derailed these attempts at BMD cooperation. Russian defense analysts have typically discounted the threat from ballistic missiles relative to other security challenges such as defending against terrorists employing simpler means of attack. Consequently, Russian officials have refused to allocate substantial resources to developing multinational BMD technologies. They also question U.S. intentions to deploy BMD assets near Russia's European borders to counter missiles launched from the Middle East and North Korea. Russian analysts further fear that U.S. BMD efforts could spur China, India, Japan and other countries to acquire or increase their own nuclear arsenals in a chain reaction of proliferation along Russia's periphery. Disagreements over taxes and legal liability have long blocked plans to establish a Joint Data Exchange Center in Moscow to monitor global missile launches. Finally, the two governments have yet to complete negotiations on a bilateral military-technical framework agreement that Russian officials insist they require to collaborate legally on BMD with the U.S.

In the area of TMD, Russia and NATO have developed air and missile defense systems that employ different technical standards, command-and-control procedures, and operational doctrines. They have only recently undertaken initiatives to overcome these interoperability problems. Restrictive technology transfer policies regularly impede defense cooperation between NATO countries; the barriers with Russia are even greater. Furthermore, Russia's growing military cooperation with China has reinforced caution among NATO governments about sharing BMD technologies. Not only could China use any intelligence in this area to overcome U.S., Japanese and Taiwanese BMD, but Chinese experts might (like their Russian colleagues) share such data with North Korea or Iran.

In recent months, Russian officials have expressed more interest in defeating Western BMD systems than in helping develop them. President Vladimir Putin and others have repeatedly claimed that the Russian military has developed revolutionary new BMD-penetration technologies. In January, Putin boasted that Russia had developed a strategic missile that could change course in flight and, thanks to its unpredictable trajectory, overcome potential BMD systems. In May, Baluyevskiy said that exercises had confirmed the effectiveness of Russia's new BMD penetration technologies. Nevertheless, the capabilities and affordability of these systems remain uncertain.

Also in May, the U.S. House of Representatives passed an amendment to the Fiscal 2007 defense authorization act endorsing greater Russia-U.S. BMD cooperation. It called for innovative forms of collaboration, including possible use of Russian missiles as exercise targets for U.S. BMD systems and U.S. use of launch data from Russia's early warning radars.

Unfortunately, the long history of failed attempts at Russian-Western BMD collaboration has demonstrated the need to reorient U.S. cooperative efforts toward other foreign governments. Recently, both Japan and Israel have evinced heightened interest in deploying defenses against regional missile threats. Unlike Russia, they have consistently sought to work with Western partners and already have track records of sharing BMD technologies and developmental costs. Although neither Japan nor Israel are NATO members, both countries would make superior partners of U.S. programs to develop defenses against ballistic missiles and shorter-range rockets such as those launched by North Korea and Hezbollah.

Richard Weitz is a senior fellow and associate director of the Center for Future Security Strategies at the Hudson Institute in Washington.

Rumsfeld Meets With Russian Counterpart

Agence France-Presse | August 28, 2006
link

US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld met his Russian counterpart Sergei Ivanov here in Alaska Sunday to discuss events in North Korea and the Middle East.

Both Washington and Moscow are concerned about Pyongyang, which on July 5 test-fired six short and mid-range missiles and one long-range missile, the Taepodong-2. All missiles fell harmlessly in the Sea of Japan.

The meeting, held at the Pike's Waterfront Lodge hotel, was scheduled to last a half hour and was to be followed by a meal

Before the meeting, Rumsfeld visited Fort Greely, some 150 kilometers (90 miles) from Fairbanks, where US 10 anti-ballistic missiles (ABMs) are positioned in underground silos.

The missiles are a key part of the US missile defense system, designed to shoot down enemy missiles fired at US soil.

The system consists of a network of early warning satellites, targeting and tracking radars, a command center based in the western US state of Colorado, and missile interceptors deployed in Alaska and at Vandenberg Air Force Base in California.

After visiting the site Rumsfeld fingered North Korea as a dangerous weapons proliferator.

"I think the real threat that North Korea poses in the immediate future is more proliferation than a danger to South Korea," he said.

The North Koreans "have been among the leading ballistic missile developers in the world and the leading ballistic missile proliferators in the world, working with Iran and with various other countries," Rumsfeld added.

Commenting on North Korea's July 5 tests, Rumsfeld said he believed it was probably important "from their standpoint to test these things so they can sell them."

Alaska has been chosen as an ABM deployment site because of its geographical location that allows the United States to protect itself against attacks coming from both the East and the West.

While the ability of the controversial anti-missile shield to function in real-life conditions is being questioned, US President George W. Bush has insisted it had a reasonable chance of shooting down a missile.

Only five out of 10 tests of missile interceptors have been successful. The last successful one dates back to 2002, but it was followed by two failures.

The US goal is to have 40 interceptors deployed in Alaska in the next years.

In the future, Washington envisions deploying interceptor missiles in Europe. However, the US Congress has not yet appropriated funds for that.

The US attitude towards missile defense "in western Europe today is much more positive than it was 10 years ago," Rumsfeld said.

Speaking earlier to reporters aboard his plane on his way to Alaska, Rumsfeld said the United States now had at its disposal a missile defense system "that is getting better every month."

We should make friends with the Russians. If we ever get into a war with China and Russia is supplying them then were done for. Look what happened in Vietnam when Russia was supplying them they fought us to a standstill. Now imagine that situation with China and all of its newfound prowess and equipment.

We cannot have China and Russia and Iran and North korea and everyone else as enemies. At least Russia needs to be some type of ally.

Russia can never be trusted...ever.

I would rather we find a way to become closer with China before making Russia an ally.

Of course, while China's current political system is in place, that will not happen, but I feel that if/when they finally make a shift to a more open and democratic society it will be a lot more promising than what Russia has become.

I have to agree with you bru...I've mentioned this before...read the book "The China Threat" by Bill Gertz. In this book, Gertz lays out how the Chinese are adhering to Mao Zedong's famous maxim: "Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." And he shows how the barrel is pointed at the United States.

'forgot to mention, just in case anyone would like to read "The China Threat"..a copy can be obtained by writing to Director of Special Sales, Regency Publishing Inc., One Massachusetts Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20001 or call (202) 216-0600.

U.S. Discusses Ballistic Missile Conversion with Russia

Submarine-Launched Missiles to Be Refitted With Conventional Warheads


(Source: US State Department; issued Aug. 30, 2006)


WASHINGTON --- The United States is considering plans to convert several of its existing long-range ballistic missiles to carry conventional explosives instead of nuclear warheads, allowing for rapid, pre-emptive strikes against terrorist targets anywhere in the world.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld spoke with reporters following a meeting with Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov to discuss the proposal, as well as several other issues currently topping the U.S.-Russian security agenda.

“We don't know how the world's going to evolve,” Rumsfeld told reporters August 27 in Fairbanks, Alaska, “but we do know that there are terrorist networks in the world, and they are already using missiles,” referencing recent attacks on Israel by the Lebanon-based terrorist group Hezbollah.

The U.S. plan calls for the conversion of several of the Navy’s submarine-launched Trident missiles to meet emerging threats from terrorism or proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. As part of the United States' and Russia’s extensive nuclear security partnership, Rumsfeld suggested that Russia consider pursuing missile conversions as well.

“If either of our countries or our friends and allies were threatened at some number of years into the future with a weapon of mass destruction or a capability that was that lethal, I think any president, whether of Russia or the United States, would like to have available a conventional weapon that could attack that party quickly and accurately and precisely and not feel that the only thing they had might be a nuclear weapon which they would not want to use,” Rumsfeld explained.

The secretary acknowledged critics’ concerns that such launches could be mistaken for a pre-emptive nuclear attack, potentially leading to a retaliatory strike.

Ivanov acknowledged that this criticism was a matter of particular concern for the Russian government and would require further discussions before Russia would support the proposal or convert any of its missiles.

“These are preliminary plans,” the defense minister stressed, “I cannot announce right now that Russia will join such [an] initiative right now.”

Rumsfeld said any nuclear-armed country currently has the technical ability to detect the launch of a long-range missile and track its flight path. By doing so, most countries would be aware of the nature of the launch well before it reached its target, and could definitively confirm that its payload was a conventional, and not a nuclear, weapon.

But Ivanov said that cruise missiles, or the development of new classes of intermediate range missiles, might be more desirable alternatives.

To lessen those concerns, Rumsfeld and Ivanov called for transparency in ongoing talks as the plan develops. Rumsfeld pledged that the United States would endeavor to build “appropriate communications links and confidence-building measures” into any resulting proposal.

Rumsfeld and Ivanov also discussed progress toward a new defense technology agreement, followed up on issues raised between President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G8 Summit and continued dialogue on security conditions in Iraq, Iran and North Korea.

Following their meeting, Rumsfeld and Ivanov attended a dedication ceremony for a memorial commemorating efforts during World War II by U.S. and Soviet troops to ferry 5,000 U.S.-built fighter planes across the Bering Strait to the U.S.S.R. under the Lend-Lease Program. The wartime transfers served as the basis for the popular 2006 Russian film, Peregon (“Transit”).

MISSILE DEFENSE CAPABILITIES PROGRESSING

While in Alaska, Rumsfeld also visited Fort Greeley, home to nine of the 11 long-range interceptors in the U.S. military’s developing missile defense system.

Rumsfeld said that missile defense “is an activity that has with each passing moment become more capable.” He also said that missile defense is “not directed at any major country”, but provides protection “against the possibility of ballistic missile attacks from a rogue country.”

The U.S. missile defense program is a combination of systems that find, target and destroy ballistic missiles. Not yet fully functional, these systems have been under development for several years, presenting engineers with a complex challenge of integrating computer, radar and missile systems in an effort commonly compared to “hitting a bullet with another bullet.”

This year has seen several advances in missile defense, including three successful ground-based missile interceptor tests in New Mexico and Hawaii, as well as the successful takedown of a ballistic missile by a ship-based interceptor system installed on the Navy Aegis warship, the USS Lake Erie.

“As additional sensors and additional interceptors are put in, this system will evolve with greater capability in terms of the numbers of missiles we can handle as well as the directions of missiles,” Rumsfeld said. “We're working with our allies around the world in both Asia and Europe to [add] those kinds of additional capabilities.”

-ends-