Military superpowers show ?

Tweet

IT might be big business in the developed and industrialised countries but the defence industry is flexing its muscle with greater intent when it comes to displaying, developing and selling their wares to countries in Asia.

That was aptly displayed at the recent Defence Services Asia (DSA) expo, where 850 companies from 45 countries participated in the four-day event, showing the variety of arsenal from handguns to jetfighters.

The reason for such a display boils down to what drives the industry spending. And it’s no surprise much of that is taking place in Asia.

Abdul Harith: If we can champion the local industry, local original equipment manufacturers would benefit from the spillover effects.>>

A report by IHS Jane’s, a defence industry publication, has forecast China’s military spending will outstrip the combined total of Nato’s top eight members Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Turkey, Canada, Spain and Poland excluding the United States by 2015.

Furthermore, growth in spending is taking off not just in China but also in South-East Asia, which has spurred its spending.

A report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute shows that the region increased its defence spending by 13.5% last year, to US$24.5bil. The figure is estimated to skyrocket to US$40bil by 2016, with the report noting that Malaysia’s defence spending has also risen.

As observers have noted, Asia will outspend Europe this year. The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) says in the think tank’s “The Military Balance 2012” annual report that China’s spending has fuelled other growing Asian states into pouring more funds into their military and defence.

According to the IISS, Asia, excluding Australia and New Zealand, spent US$262bil on defence in 2011 with China alone accounting for US$89bil compared with Nato’s European members, which spent about US$270bil.

Five contracts and 15 memorandums of understanding worth a total of more than RM4bil were signed between the Defence Ministry and several local and foreign companies in conjunction with the DSA.

Five contracts worth RM357.2mil were inked between the ministry with four local companies and a Russian firm.

With military superpowers like the United States and Russia flexing their military might, smaller Scandinavian countries were seen displaying their sophisticated equipment and gadgetry at Asia’s largest arms exhibition.

Life-size replicas of an AugustaWestland helicopter and a Eurofighter Typhoon attracted crowds in droves, along with military equipment and weaponry that were available for tryouts (sans the artillery).

The new behemoth in the sky, the Airbus Military A400M tactical airlifter, also made a stop at the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF) Subang airbase in conjunction with the exhibition.

The exhibition has also set the stage for Malaysian companies to showcase their growing expertise within the sphere of the defence industry.

A full-sized replica of the Eurofighter Typhoon parked on the PWTC parking lot is one of the main attractions of the DSA 2012.

At the DSA, visitors were treated to demonstrations by commandos and static displays occupying a floor space of 40,000sq m.

Tucked in a corner of the show, British-based defence, aerospace and security company BAE Systems is slowly but definitely shifting its focus to the Asean region and the wider Asia-Paficic.

Vice-president for Malaysia and Indonesia Mark Burgess tells StarBizWeek that the company had recently shifted its entire operations from Singapore to Malaysia in a bid to establish its regional hub in Kuala Lumpur.

“We see far greater opportunity in the Malaysian market both in terms of sales and partnerships. For the last 20 years, Malaysia has been a far more successful market than Singapore. Strategically, coupled with a number of reasons, it makes much more sense to move our office here,” he says.

For the record, BAE Systems is vying to supply its combat aircraft, Eurofighter Typhoon, to the Government, which is currently considering to retire the ageing fleet of Russian made MIG-29N under the Multi Role Combat Aircraft (MRCA) programme.

It is looking to supply a fleet of 18 to 36 of fully-equipped Typhoons to the RMAF, of which it had submitted a formal proposal that comprise a 100-page list of technologies that the company was willing to transfer as well as names of local and overseas companies that were willing to participate in the process.

With the re-establishment of Malaysia-Britain bilateral relations in almost 20 years following a visit by British Prime Minister David Cameron, the Typhoon deal is seemingly a catalyst to strengthen critical trade relationship between both countries.

“We are not new to this market, as BAE Systems had helped with the start up of SME Aerospace Sdn Bhd by contracting it to manufacture Hawk aircraft pylons with the technical assistance of BAE Systems back in 1992,” Burgess says.

He says BAE Systems is also central to the creation of Composites Technology Research Malaysia Sdn Bhd, which benefited from the transfer of technology from BAE and has since transformed itself to a full-fledged composite component manufacturer for the aviation industry.

“BAE System and its consortium of manufacturers had bought about £800mil worth of goods and services from Malaysia. Based on current plans, another £1.5bil of expenditure is expected to be channelled into Malaysia over the next five years,” he says.

Burgess says BAE Systems and part of its consortium are already a very important trade and investment partners with Malaysia, and the MRCA programme will build the relationship further via offset policies that are imposed by the Ministry of Defence.

Offset agreements are often an integral part of international defence contracts, where a supplier often agrees to buy products from a local country in order to win the country as a customer, while in return reinvest the money into the country via the purchase of components, services and technology transfer.

Another party benefiting from technology transfers and joint ventures (JV) is DRB-Hicom Defence Technology Sdn Bhd (Deftech). It has a successful JV with several big names including Turkish firm FNSS, which manufactures several types of armoured personnel carriers (APC).

FNSS is a JV established by Nurol Holding of Turkey and 49% owned by BAE Systems Land & Armaments LP.

When met on the sidelines of DSA 2012, DRB-HICOM head for automotive and defence Abdul Harith Abdullah says the conglomerate is looking for more industrial collaborations and this is just only the beginning of a bigger picture to drive the nation’s defence industry.

“The 8×8 wheeled APC is the starting point for us to make our presence felt in the international arena. The defence budget for Malaysia is not extremely big in any way and to survive in the industry, we could not limit ourselves to just land-based businesses,” he points out.

With the collaboration with FNSS, doors are opened to Deftech to acquire valuable technological know-how and intellectual property to enable it to design and manufacture APVs on their own in the future.

Deftech is also keen to stretch its wings to go into the aviation and naval industries. Last year, Deftech was awarded a RM7.55bil contract from the Government to supply 257 units of APCs in 12 variants.

The Malaysian army might require as many as 500 such vehicles to replace the soon-to-be obsolete Condor and Sibmas-type APCs that were in use since the early 1980s.

In 2002, Deftech collaborated with FNSS to supply 211 of ACV300 to the country.

“Our aim is to be at the forefront of the national defence industry and not just rely on trade. If we can champion the local industry, local original equipment manufacturers would benefit from the spillover effects, and we are hoping for a really big success to expand internationally,” he says.

At the DSA 2012, DefTech signed a cooperation agreement with India’s Tata Motors to develop and promote Tata’s high-mobility vehicles.

Last year, DRB-Hicom signed an industrial cooperation teaming agreement with Sweden’s SAAB AB as part of a collaboration to supply airborne early-warning and control system to the RMAF.

Meanwhile, Destini Bhd is also vying for a piece of the pie in the defence industry, with an ultimate aim to grow its business outside Malaysia.

Destini, a maintenance, repair and overhaul service provider for safety survival and rescue equipments, is also involved in the trading of military supplies. It was awarded a RM7.9mil contract to supply the army with anti-tank 40mm rocket-propelled grenades.

Destini group managing director Datuk Rozabil Abdul Rahman says the defence industry is not an easy business to venture into.

“The spending in the local defence industry is shrinking, and that is the reason why we desire to expand overseas. For the other second liners, you should think big and expand and not just rely on local contracts,” he says.

By CHOONG EN HAN han@thestar.com.my

‘Poke-eye’ Melayu English blunder, Mindef blames Google, my God!

Tweet

Mindef blames Google Translate for ‘poke-eye’ blunder

By P. ARUNA The Star/Asia News Network

Lost in translation: The amusing English translation of the staff dress code on the Defence Ministry website.

RAWANG: The Defence Ministry had relied on the free online Google Translate for the English version of its official website, which resulted in the many mistakes found on the site.

“We have corrected the mistakes and translations are no longer done that way. “It is now done manually,” Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said here yesterday.

He admitted that the inaccurate translations had caused much embarrassment to the ministry.

It was recently reported in The Star that amusing translations of the staff dress code on the ministry’s official website were being shared on social networking websites.

The ministry’s website had published translations such as “clothes that poke eye”, a literal translation of pakaian yang menjolok mata, which in actual fact means revealing clothes in Bahasa Malaysia.

Others included “collared shirts and tight Malay civet berbutang three”, which, in Malay, is berkolar baju Melayu cekak musang berbutang tiga.

Another was the brief summary of the ministry’s history on the website, which read: “After the withdrawal of British army, the Malaysian Government take drastic measures to increase the level of any national security threat”.

The ministry took down its English translated version several hours after it went viral on Twitter and Facebook.

In an immediate response, a ministry spokesman had said that a clarification had been posted on the website, saying that corrective action was being taken to ensure that the translations were accurate.

“We did not intend for the English translations to turn out that way,” said Dr Zahid during a visit to the National Service camp here.

However, a check on the website showed that the English translations were still unavailable.

Thursday January 12, 2012, The Star

No ‘poke eye’ from Google Translate

I WAS very disturbed to read “Mindef blames Google Translate for ‘poke-eye blunder” (The Star, Jan 10).

I logged on to Google Translate online service and typed “Jangan pakai pakaian yang menjolok mata” and was given the translation “Do not wear scantily”.

This is a correct translation. I don’t know where Mindef got the translation “Do not wear clothes that poke the eye”?

Of course, the Ministry staff would need to have an equally good command of English to review what is translated using online translation tools.

LEE SWEE CHUAN, Klang.

Related posts:

“Clothes that poke eye”, Melayu English; Lost in translation!

‘Poke eye’ Melayu English in many public institutions inexcusable!

Prepare for combat, China’s Hu urges navy!

Tweet

AFP
Chinese President Hu Jintao Tuesday urged the navy to prepare for military combat amid growing regional tensions over maritime disputes and a US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific power.

The navy should “accelerate its transformation and modernisation in a sturdy way, and make extended preparations for military combat in order to make greater contributions to safeguard national security,” he said.

Addressing the powerful Central Military Commission, Hu said: “Our work must closely encircle the main theme of national defence and military building.”

His remarks, which were posted on a statement on a government website, come amid growing US and regional concerns over China’s naval ambitions, particularly in the South China Sea.

Chinese President Hu Jintao on Tuesday urged the navy to prepare for military combat, amid growing regional tensions over maritime disputes and a US campaign to assert itself as a Pacific power.

The navy should “accelerate its transformation and modernisation in a sturdy way, and make extended preparations for military combat in order to make greater contributions to safeguard national security,” he said.

Addressing the powerful Central Military Commission, Hu said: “Our work must closely encircle the main theme of national defence and military building.”

His comments, which were posted in a statement on a government website, come as the United States and Beijing’s neighbours have expressed concerns over its naval ambitions, particularly in the South China Sea.

Several Asian nations have competing claims over parts of the South China Sea, believed to encompass huge oil and gas reserves, while China claims it all. One-third of global seaborne trade passes through the region.

Vietnam and the Philippines have accused Chinese forces of increasing aggression there.

In a translation of Hu’s comments, the official Xinhua news agency quoted the president as saying China’s navy should “make extended preparations for warfare.”

The Pentagon however downplayed Hu’s speech, saying that Beijing had the right to develop its military, although it should do so transparently.

“They have a right to develop military capabilities and to plan, just as we do,” said Pentagon spokesman George Little, but he added, “We have repeatedly called for transparency from the Chinese and that’s part of the relationship we’re continuing to build with the Chinese military.”

“Nobody’s looking for a scrap here,” insisted another spokesman, Admiral John Kirby. “Certainly we wouldn’t begrudge any other nation the opportunity, the right to develop naval forces to be ready.

“Our naval forces are ready and they’ll stay ready.”

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said: “We want to see stronger military-to-military ties with China and we want to see greater transparency. That helps answer questions we might have about Chinese intentions.”

Hu’s announcement comes in the wake of trips to Asia by several senior US officials, including President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

US undersecretary of defence Michelle Flournoy is due to meet in Beijing with her Chinese counterparts on Wednesday for military-to-military talks.

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao last month warned against interference by “external forces” in regional territorial disputes including those in the South China Sea.

And China said late last month it would conduct naval exercises in the Pacific Ocean, after Obama, who has dubbed himself America’s first Pacific president, said the US would deploy up to 2,500 Marines to Australia.

China’s People’s Liberation Army, the largest military in the world, is primarily a land force, but its navy is playing an increasingly important role as Beijing grows more assertive about its territorial claims.

Earlier this year, the Pentagon warned that Beijing was increasingly focused on its naval power and had invested in high-tech weaponry that would extend its reach in the Pacific and beyond.

China’s first aircraft carrier began its second sea trial last week after undergoing refurbishments and testing, the government said.

The 300-metre (990-foot) ship, a refitted former Soviet carrier, underwent five days of trials in August that sparked international concern about China’s widening naval reach.

Beijing only confirmed this year that it was revamping the old Soviet ship and has repeatedly insisted that the carrier poses no threat to its neighbours and will be used mainly for training and research purposes.

But the August sea trials were met with concern from regional powers including Japan and the United States, which called on Beijing to explain why it needs an aircraft carrier.

China, which publicly announced around 50 separate naval exercises in the seas off its coast over the past two years — usually after the event — says its military is only focused on defending the country’s territory.

Related post:

Pentagon planning Cold War against China – AirSea …

Active-service aircraft carriers in world

Tweet

Summary:

USA Russia Japan UK France Italy Spain Brazil Ag’tna India SKorea Thai.Total

 3    1      1      1   1       2       1    1     1       1      1     1    15

1) USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) aircraft carrier of the United States

2) USS Nimitz (CVN-68) aircraft carrier of the United States

3) USS Enterprise (CVN-65) aircraft carrier of the United States

4) HMS Ark Royal aircraft carrier of the United Kingdom

5) Hyuga aircraft carrier of Japan

6) ARA Veinticinco de Mayo (V-2) aircraft carrier of Argentina

7) HTMS Chakri Naruebet aircraft carrier of Thailand

8) NAe São Paulo aircraft carrier of Brazil

9) ROKS Dokdo (LPH 6111) aircraft carrier of South Korea

10) INS ViraatINS Viraat aircraft carrier of India

11) Principe de Asturias-class aircraft carrier of Spain

12) Conte Di Cavour aircraft carrier of Italy

13) Giuseppe Garibaldi aircraft carrier of Italy

14) Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier of Russia

15) Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier of France

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Appearances aside, not yet all at sea: US vs China!

Image via Wikipedia
Tweet

Appearances aside, not yet all at sea

Behind The Headlines By BUNN NAGARA

THE People’s Liberation Army (PLA) set up a new office to streamline its management last Tuesday, and this week the PLA Navy will conduct training in the Western Pacific.

Some of this may be China’s response to enhanced US manoeuvres in the region, although in declaring plans to station US troops in northern Australia, President Barack Obama said they were “not aimed against any country in particular”.

Beijing also described the sea exercises as “routine” and not aimed against any country in particular. How did it all begin?

In Tokyo, Hanoi and Manila, China’s recent postures over disputed maritime territory have made a renewal of US “commitment” to the region timely.

However, Beijing sees recent US moves in Vietnam and the Philippines, following alliance-building in Japan, Australia and India, as provocative encirclement.

China’s moves are then regarded as justified reaction. Only the type and degree of reaction are being debated in Beijing.

China is neither anxious nor impatient to respond to US moves. Any change in Chinese foreign policy or naval deployment would take time through party-government-military hierarchies, and present circumstances discourage it.

The US is heading into a presidential election, with China itself readying for leadership changes next year. Beijing wants to avoid being sidetracked or becoming a US election issue.

The atmosphere of mutual US-China suspicion has developed so keenly as to make caveats necessary. In announcing diplomatic initiatives in Myanmar, Washington said they were not meant to isolate Myanmar’s long-time ally China.

But US attempts at alliance-building have seen patchy results. South Korea’s right-wing President Lee Myung-bak has not agreed to just about any US proposal to counter China’s rise.

Seoul is unimpressed by Obama’s trade grouping, the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), a discreet alliance that excludes China. Australia is in this effort to draw a dividing line down the Pacific but not Japan, since the latter already hosts US troops and has military ties with the US.

For the TPP to exclude the second and third largest economies in the world shows its main concern cannot be trade. And for the US to dominate the TPP’s membership reveals its unilateral nature.

South Korea is unsympathetic to the TPP since it already has problems domestically in ratifying a Free Trade Agreement with the US. However much some countries may agree ideologically, national interests come first.

The same applies to the US in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which Washington has signed but refused to ratify. The US here is in the company of a handful of countries like Afghanistan, Bhutan, Burundi, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Rwanda.

A total of 161 countries, including China, have signed and ratified the Law of the Sea treaty covering the rights and responsibilities of nations at sea, from issues like navigation to pollution. China is particularly irked when the US lectures it on how to behave at sea.

China’s latest overtures have been attractive offers: US$10bil (RM319.7bil) in trade credits for Asean, US$3bil (RM9.6bil) for a new maritime cooperation fund, and efforts to boost two-way trade to US$400bil (RM1.3 trillion) this year alone.

Last Wednesday, Japan’s Foreign Minister visited Beijing, and the next day both countries jointly announced a commitment to build stronger ties. Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda will visit China next year to mark the 40th anniversary of normalised relations.

In foreign policy, China is at a promising crossroads. This establishment has long been a small elite, founded largely on the Standing Committee Politburo of the Communist Party and the Central Military Commission, yet whose composition has been somewhat messy.

But that establishment is now more open than before, with more inputs from other actors such as diplomats, scholars, policy researchers, media, major state corporations and local governments. The Foreign Ministry may be heralding the opening of a new China, provided that foreign provocations do not force a reversal.

Current US strategy on China is multi-pronged, which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton calls “smart power”: an opportune combination of “hard” and “soft” power as coined by Harvard’s Joseph Nye.

Hard power concerns traditional power like military forces, whereas soft power covers cultural issues like mass entertainment, Peace Corps volunteers and institutions like the TPP and the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI).

The “hard” and “soft” concepts are analogous to Chinese kung fu, whose written records of these styles go back at least 2,500 years. So China already has a head start on that.

And in kung fu, the soft style may be less obvious but more sophisticated and effective.

Related post:

The role that the US plays in Asia: Containment of China!

Pentagon planning Cold War against China – AirSea Battle concept! 

ASEAN Sumit: US reasserts role as Pacific power, creates “vicious circle of tension”; Indon military warns!

Tweet

Leaders and representatives of the ASEAN countries link hands during the opening of the 19th ASEAN Summit on the Indonesian resort island of Bali Thursday. Photo: AFP

US President Barack Obama Thursday reiterated his country’s determination to consolidate its role in the Asia-Pacific, a day after Beijing questioned Washington’s decision to expand its military presence in Australia.

“The US is a Pacific power, and we are here to stay,” Obama said when addressing the Australian Parliament in Canberra, repeating the exact phrases he used at the APEC summit in Honolulu over the weekend.

“I have directed my national security team to make our presence and missions in the Asia-Pacific a top priority. As a result, reductions in US defense spending will not come at the expense of the Asia-Pacific,” the US president said.

Obama acknowledged China’s concerns over the growing US presence, saying, “We’ll seek more opportunities for cooperation with Beijing, including greater communication between our militaries to promote understanding and avoid miscalculation.”

The AP commented that this is an “unmistakable message” from the White House chief to Beijing on Washington’s determination to counter a rising China.

In response, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Liu Weimin said Thursday, “We hold no objection to the development of regular relations between countries. But we hope they can consider others’ interests, regional peace and stability before making any move.”

“Firmly upholding the development of Sino-US ties based on mutual respect and reciprocal cooperation will benefit the two sides, as well as the whole world,” Liu said.

However, a commentary by the Xinhua News Agency said Thursday, “It wouldn’t come as a surprise if the US is trying to seek hegemony in the region, which would be in line with its aspirations as a global superpower.”

“It is hard to envision what kind of ‘leadership’ the US aspires to have in the region. What the region really needs is a strong and reliable partner that can help the region stave off the current financial crisis and seek balanced and sustained growth,” it added.

Obama arrived in Bali Thursday for the Sixth East Asia Summit starting tomorrow, making him the first US president to take part in the event.

Yuan Peng, director of the Institute of US Studies of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times that by joining the summit, the US now formally becomes a force in the region.

“It highlights the complete shift of Washington’s strategic focus to the East. The strategic gravity of the US will remain in the Asia-Pacific region in the coming decade,” Yuan said.

The US has signaled it will raise the South China Sea issue during the summit despite Beijing’s objections.

Philippine Foreign Secretary Albert del Rosario has also asked ASEAN to host a multilateral summit that would discuss the issue, but a number of the bloc’s members, including Malaysia and Cambodia, rejected Manila’s initiative.

Liu reiterated China’s stance Thursday, warning that interference from other countries would only complicate the issue, and Beijing would not accept any attempts to harm its sovereignty and interests.

Wu Xinbo, a deputy director of the Center for US Studies at the Fudan University, told the Global Times that the South China Sea issue has become more complicated with the greater US presence.

“At some point, the issue will involve several countries in the region, so assembling countries involved in the negotiations could be a supplement to one-on-one talks. However, it should be noted that the multilateral negotiations can only be held among related parties, and any external forces should be excluded,” Wu said.

Meanwhile, Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda and his ASEAN counterparts are expected to issue a joint declaration on boosting cooperation on maritime security and safety in the region during the Japan-ASEAN meeting on the sidelines of the Bali summit.

Japan’s Kyodo News commented that although Japan seems to be an outsider in the South China Sea issue, its behavior mirrors Tokyo’s own run-ins with Beijing in connection to the East China Sea.

Separately, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao also arrived in Bali Thursday to attend the East Asia Summit, the 14th between China and ASEAN, as well as the 14th between ASEAN, China, Japan and South Korea and an event that marks the 20th anniversary of the China-ASEAN dialogue.

Wen is expected to reiterate China’s policies on deepening cooperation with ASEAN in political, economic and cultural fields. ASEAN and China leaders will also review the development of bilateral ties and map out strategic planning for the future.

“In such a complicated and serious international political and economic situation, the upcoming summits should highlight the theme of unity, development and cooperation,” Wen said during talks with Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono Thursday.

“China said it plans to set up a fund for maritime cooperation with ASEAN and is preparing about 3 billion yuan ($472 million) to develop cooperation in maritime industries,” Indonesian presidential spokesman Teuku Faizasyah said after the leaders’ talks.

Zhu Shanshan and agencies contributed to the story

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Indon military warns about Aust-US plan

Karlis Salna, AAP South-East Asia Correspondent

A top Indonesian military chief has warned plans for the United States to boost its military presence in Australia could fuel tensions regarding an ongoing maritime dispute over the South China Sea.

The plan, which was unveiled by US President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard in Canberra on Wednesday, has already caused friction at the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Bali.

Indonesian military commander Admiral Agus Suhartono has now added his voice to concerns the plan could add to an increasingly tense dispute over the resource-rich South China Sea.

China and four ASEAN countries – Malaysia, the Philippines, Brunei and Vietnam – have staked claims over the crucial sea lane, which handles more than one-third of the world’s seaborne trade and half its traffic in oil and gas.

Admiral Suhartono, who has formerly served as the Indonesian Navy’s chief of staff, has warned the increased US military presence, which is seen also seen as a hedge against the growing influence of China in the Asia-Pacific region, could draw Indonesia into the dispute.

Under the plan, announced in Canberra on Wednesday, up to 250 US Marines will train for six months at a time in the Northern Territory, just 800km from Indonesia, rising to a full 2500-strong Marine Air Ground Task Force by 2016.

The US forces will bring ships, aircraft and vehicles.

“Their military fleets would very likely go back and forth through our waters, given the analysis that the planned base will have to conduct due to rising tensions in the South China Sea,” Admiral Suhartono told the Jakarta Post newspaper.

Admiral Suhartono said the US military presence in Australia would impact Indonesia in terms of political and security stability in South-East Asia.

“We haven’t learned clearly what this deal is but we have been studying the plan and analysing any potential impacts on Indonesia as well as on the South-East Asian region,” he said.

“We have begun consulting all sources concerned with this issue.”

China has been relatively restrained in its response to the US-Australia military pact.

“As for relations among China, the United States and Australia, I think that further deepening and strengthening Chinese co-operation with the US and with Australia suits the interests of all these countries as well as the other countries in the region and the international community,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu Weimin said.

But a spokesman for Philippines President Gloria Arroyo, speaking on the sidelines of the ASEAN summit on Thursday evening, said there was no doubt the increased US military presence in the Asia-Pacific region would strengthen the Philippines’ hand against Beijing in terms of the South China Sea issue.

“I think it bolsters our ability to assert our sovereignty over certain areas,” spokesman Ricky Carandang said.

© 2011 AAP Newscribe : get free news in real time

Indonesia fears US forces could create “vicious circle of tension”

Tom Allard

Indonesia has expressed concerns that the increased US military presence in northern Australia could provoke a ”vicious circle of tension and mistrust” in the region.

”What I would hate to see is if such a development were to provoke a reaction and counter-reaction,” said Indonesian foreign minister Marty Natalegawa, speaking before the ASEAN and East Asia leaders’ summits, which begin in Bali today.

Without stringent efforts to consult with other countries in the region, he added, it could lead to misunderstanding and provoke a ”vicious circle of tension and mistrust”.

Mr Natalegawa said he was briefed on the new arrangement, under which US marines and air force personnel will next year begin six-month training deployments to Australia, by Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd.

He suggested that countries in the Asia Pacific would need to be consulted in more depth in Bali.

US President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Julia Gillard arrive in Bali tonight and tomorrow for the summits, which are being hosted by Indonesia and will focus on security and political issues.

The closer defence co-operation between Australia and the US is widely seen as a measure to counter any military threat from a rapidly emerging China.

Equally, though, the increased number of US troops training in the Northern Territory is occurring right on Indonesia’s doorstep.

Newscribe : get free news in real time 

India sees China as ‘de facto competitor’

Tweet

(China Daily)

BEIJING – Recent bold moves regarding India’s armed forces have political rather than military objectives, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Daily said.

India’s repositioning of its national security strategy has led to the country “starting to treat China as a de facto competitor”, it said in a commentary on Wednesday.

“China has always adhered to the principle of ‘peaceful rise’. But this has been misinterpreted by some countries as a ‘rising threat’,” it said.

The response came a week after the Indian Ministry of Defense announced its biggest expansion package to date, a $13 billion military modernization plan.

Within five years, the project is set to deploy 90,000 more soldiers and raise four new divisions along India’s border with China, the largest such mobilization since the Sino-Indian border clashes of 1962.

The Indian military is also in the final phase of choosing between two fighter jets in what is said to be the world’s largest defense deal. For months, the Eurofighter Typhoon and the French Dassault Rafale aircraft have been competing for an Indian Air Force contract that is now worth more than $20 billion – almost double the original estimate.

These moves followed the Indian government’s decision in October to deploy Brahmos cruise missiles against China, the first time it has taken such a step with offensive tactical missiles.

India is also pushing for its first joint air force and naval exercises with Japan, which Indian Defense Minister A K Antony revealed during his visit to Japan last week.

On Monday, a senior former Indian diplomat said India, as a potential “positive balancer” in East Asia, wants to see a strong Japan in the context of China’s rise.

A strong Japan would play a positive role in maintaining the strategic balance in the region, former Indian ambassador to Japan Hemant Krishan Singh said in New Delhi at a discussion on the US-Japan alliance.

During the same discussion, Sheila A. Smith, a senior fellow with the US-based Council on Foreign Relations, said Japan’s “strategic discomfort” has been growing amid the rise of China in recent years.

The discussion was held just weeks ahead of a proposed trilateral dialogue involving India, US and Japan that experts said was aimed at keeping China in check.

The trilateral dialogue, to be held by the year’s end, will discuss regional issues, the US State Department said last week.

China has not commented on the matter.

“The West’s vigilance and confinement of China’s rise are increasing. One of its means is to take advantage of China’s conflicts and issues with its neighboring countries, and instigate and radicalize issues to exhaust China’s energy, resources and strategic projection,” said Fu Xiaoqiang, an expert on South Asian studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

China should “take it easy” when outsiders feel uneasy about its growth and role in regional as well as global affairs, said Feng Yujun, head of Russian studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

China should “take it easy” when outsiders feel uneasy about its growth and role in regional as well as global affairs, said Feng Yujun, head of Russian studies at the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations.

China should not only remain alert of actions taken by parties to contain its rise, but also actively adjust its strategy and focus on improving its relations with neighboring countries instead of the big powers, said Jin Yinan, head of the Strategic Research Institute at National Defense University.

India and China are slated to become the world’s largest trading partners by 2030, according to estimates by the Associated Chambers of Commerce and Industry of India.

But analysts say India’s increasingly assertive approaches, acting as a counterweight to the rise of China, are reshaping the Asian strategic landscape.

“This is largely projected as a response to India’s threat perceptions of China,” wrote M K Bhadrakumar, a former career diplomat who served as India’s ambassador to Turkey and Uzbekistan, in the Hong Kong-based Asia Times Online on Tuesday.

Meanwhile, in Washington, US Deputy Secretary of State William Burns last week hailed India’s “Look East” policy as becoming an “Act East” policy. “India’s rise will reshape the international system,” he said.

Kim R. Holmes, vice-president of the Heritage Foundation and former US assistant secretary of state, said closer India-US ties are the natural result of a rising China.

“I believe that growing strategic challenges presented by a rising China and continuing threats from terrorism in the region will inevitably drive the US and India to cooperate more closely on defense and other key sectors like space, maritime security and nuclear nonproliferation,” he said.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

China to Launch Space Station Test Module Next Week

Tweet

China to Launch Space Station Test Module

by Clara Moskowitz, SPACE.com Senior Writer

China is developing its first full-fledged space station, called Tiangong (Heavenly Palace). Early tests of China’s skills at rendezvous and docking, shown in this artist’s illustration, are set to begin in 2011. CREDIT: China Manned Space Engineering Office View full size image

China will launch a test module for its first space station next week between Sept. 27 and Sept. 30, state media reported today (Sept. 20).

The unmanned module, called Tiangong-1 (which means “Heavenly Palace”) will test autonomous docking procedures and other space operations in preparation for China’s plan to build a 60-ton space station by the year 2020.

The Chinese Long March 2F rocket set to launch Tiangong-1 has already been rolled out to its launch platform at the Jiuquan Satellite Launch Center in northwest China’s Gansu Province, according to state-run news service Xinhua. [Photos: China's First Space Station]

The liftoff was delayed last month when a Long March 2C booster, similar to the rocket that will loft Tiangong-1, failed to deliver an experimental unmanned satellite to orbit. However, after an investigation into the accident, China successfully launched a military satellite aboard a related Long March 3B/E rocket on Sunday (Sept. 18), clearing the way for the Tiangong liftoff.

Final tests of the spacecraft and its booster will take place over the next few days, a project spokesperson told Xinhua.

“Every main system is standing by and the final preparations are running smoothly,” Xinhua reported.

The 8.5-ton Tiangong-1 is slated to dock with the unmanned Shenzhou 8 spacecraft, which will launch at a later date. It will be the first docking between Chinese spacecraft, and will represent a significant step forward in the nation’s space capabilities, experts have said.

Medical and engineering experiments will also be carried aboard Tiangong-1. [How China's First Space Station Will Work (Infographic)]

China is only the third country, after the Soviet Union and the United States, to launch a person to orbit. The first Chinese manned mission, Shenzhou 5, launched astronaut Yang Liwei in 2003. Two more manned missions followed, including a flight that featured the nation’s first spacewalk in 2008.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Global military dominance becoming unaffordable

Tweet

Midweek by BUNN NAGARA

Both ‘Britannia’ and the Western alliance are losing the means to perpetuate military-political hegemony worldwide.

BRITAIN was once a proud maritime power, with a foremost Royal Navy that policed a global empire on which “the sun never set.”

These days the British Navy has trouble trying to pin down a single Third World country with a tottering regime: Libya. This incompatibility between present Western capacities and current intentions is, however, greater than any disjuncture with past glories.

This week Admiral Sir Mark Stanhope, Britain’s First Sea Lord, announced that the Royal Navy would not be able to sustain the current campaign against Libya for more than six months. He also noted that the decline is in both equipment inventory and, consequently, morale.

Britain’s Strategic Defence and Security Review last year had cut 10,000 jobs in the Navy and Royal Air Force, and consigned the aircraft carrier Ark Royal, the frigate HMS Cumberland and the once-iconic Harrier jets to the storeroom or junkyard.

As the Libya military campaign suddenly loomed, the Cumberland was diverted there to help in evacuating British nationals. Yet for Downing Street, Britain remains a leading military power with the world’s fourth-largest defence budget.

Evidently like much of Europe, Britain’s lack of appetite for global patrolling work is not totally in sync with US interventionist moves. The “pole positions” occupied by Britain and France over Col. Muammar Gaddafi’s Libya helps to conceal the incongruity, but not for long.

When US Defence Secretary Robert Gates reportedly blasted unnamed Nato partners in Brussels last week for not contributing their share, he ridiculed some for running out of ammunition at critical times in laying siege to a country. The Royal Navy now needs to purchase more Cruise missiles from the US after firing some of them.

The US provides more than 75% of Nato’s budget, with Gates wondering aloud whether this major contribution and Nato itself could be sustained. All of this has come at a time of budget squeezes, after Osama bin Laden’s death and a Cold War which ended 20 years ago.

Washington has been lobbying its European partners in Nato to raise their military commitment, much of it in vain. It is not that the latter do not share US concerns about global instability, but rather they prefer political, diplomatic, economic and social solutions rather than inordinately military ones.

After Iraq, the US has waded into Afghanistan, Pakistan and Libya while straining to get stuck into Syria. Its challenge is to get a sizeable number of allies to go along to a significant degree.

For much of the world outside Washington, a propensity for unilateral military intervention abroad links these various armed adventures. It is not a popular indulgence, not even when the spectre of international terrorism is invoked as the alternative to inaction.

If the continued role of global policeman today seems dated, it is even more surreal given emerging major powers such as those in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa). These are all fast-growing major economies, besides Russia and China being permanent members of the UNSC with veto power.

This week both Moscow and Beijing boycotted a UNSC meeting called by the Western powers to discuss a proposed resolution against Syria. The other BRICS countries are also unhappy with the prospect of further war against another oil-rich Muslim country.

Even in Western circles there is strong reluctance to rely on more military power. Germany, Europe’s leading economy and a major Nato partner, is still unconvinced by the campaign against Libya.

But if the interests of the military-industrial complex are any guide, efforts will continue towards war. Officially there are six major US military bases in Afghanistan, but on the ground US and other foreign forces are stationed at some 400 bases in the country.

Although the Obama White House is supposed to comply with its pullout schedule in Afghanistan, secret talks with Kabul are continuing over the actual outcome. There are reports that US forces may well remain in Afghanistan for decades after the 2014 complete pullout date.

On the surface the issue is a resurgent Taliban and their terror connections, but strategically Afgha­nistan is critically located in Central Asia next door to China, Pakistan and Iran. So long as it remains in that position, which it will, the great powers will play their “games” while the locals will fight a war to resist them.

Afghanistan meanwhile is pressing for better terms in a draft agreement that would reflect its sense of sovereignty. Whether that would work is another question.

China, Russia Could Make U.S. Stealth Tech Obsolete

Tweet

By David Axe, Wired News

It’s been a pillar of the U.S. military’s approach to high-tech warfare for decades. And now, it could become obsolete in just a few years.

Stealth technology — which today gives U.S. jets the nearly unparalleled ability to slip past hostile radar — may soon be unable to keep American aircraft cloaked. That’s the potentially startling conclusion of a new report from Barry Watts, a former member of the Pentagon’s crystal-ball-gazing Office of Net Assessment and current analyst with the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments in Washington.

“The advantages of stealth … may be eroded by advances in sensors and surface-to-air missile systems, especially for manned strike platforms operating inside defended airspace,” Watts cautions in his 43-page report The Maturing Revolution in Military Affairs (.pdf), published last week.

That could come as a big shock to the U.S. Air Force, which has bet its future on radar-dodging technology, to the tune of half-a-trillion dollars over the next 30 years. The Navy, on the other hand, might have reason to say, “I told you so.”

That is, if Watts’ prediction comes true — and that’s a big “if,” the analyst admits.

“In recent years there has been speculation that ongoing advances in radar detection and tracking will, in the near future, obviate the ability of all-aspect, low-observable aircraft such as the B-2, F-22 and F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, aka JSF, to survive inside denied airspace,” Watts writes, referring to America’s stealth bombers and fighter jets.

Stealth-killing advances include VHF and UHF radars being developed by Russia and China, and a “passive-detection” system devised by Czech researchers. The latter “uses radar, television, cellular phone and other available signals of opportunity reflected off stealthy aircraft to find and track them,” Watts explains.

These new detection systems could reverse a 30-year trend that has seen the U.S. Air Force gain an increasing advantage over enemy defenses. That phenomenon began with the introduction of the F-117 stealth fighter in the late 1980s, followed by the addition of the stealthy B-2 (pictured) in the ’90s and, more recently, the F-22.

So far, the Air Force has only ever fielded a few hundred stealth aircraft, requiring it to constantly upgrade some nonstealthy fighters. But the flying branch plans to purchase more than 1,700 F-35s (at more than $100 million a pop) from Lockheed Martin in coming decades, plus up to 100 new stealth bombers. In that sense, the stealth era is only now truly dawning — just as effective counter-measures are nearly ready, Watts points out.

In that sense, the Air Force’s stealth gamble could turn into very, very long odds.

Comparatively, the Navy has played it safe. At the same time the Air Force was investing its research and development dollars in stealth, the Navy has taken a different approach to defeating enemy defenses. Where the Air Force plans to slip past radars, the Navy means to jam them with electronic noisemakers or destroy them with radar-seeking missiles. That’s why the only radar-killing planes in the Pentagon inventory belong to the Navy — and why, until the forthcoming F-35C, the Navy has never bought a stealth fighter.

Nowhere is that philosophical difference more apparent than in the Pentagon’s on-again, off-again effort to develop jet-powered killer drones. The Navy’s X-47 drone, built by Northrop, is minimally stealthy. Boeing’s Phantom Ray, intended mostly for Air Force programs, is arguably as stealthy as an F-35 in certain scenarios.

There’s still a chance the Air Force’s bet on stealth could pay off, Watts writes. That largely depends on two capabilities planned for the F-35.

First, there’s “the JSF’s sensor suite and computational power,” which Watts explains “can be easily upgraded over time due to the plane’s open avionics architecture, giv[ing] the F-35 an ability to adjust its flight path in real time in response to pop-up threats, something neither the F-117 nor the B-2 have been able to do.”

Second, the F-35’s radar, a so-called “electronically scanned array,” could in theory be used to jam an enemy radar or even slip malicious software code into its control system.

Neither of these capabilities is actually a form of stealth, per se. Rather, they would complement the F-35’s ability to absorb or deflect radar waves. Described uncharitably, the Air Force has had to add nonstealthy skills to its stealth fighters, just to help them survive.

Watts doesn’t address one other way the Air Force could preserve its stealth advantage: by speeding up the development of drone aircraft — which, by virtue of their smaller size, have the potential to be much stealthier than any manned aircraft.

It’s also worth noting that America’s biggest rivals don’t doubt the continuing relevance of stealthy planes. Russia and China have both unveiled new stealth-fighter prototypes in the last two years.

The way Watts describes it, the “end of stealth” is just one of the many big changes that could occur in near-future warfare — big emphasis on “could.” “The honest answer to the question about how fundamentally war’s conduct will change — and how soon — remains: It depends.”

Photo: B-2 stealth bomber (U.S. Air Force)

Newscribe : get free news in real time