China's Plan to Beat U.S.: Missiles, Missiles and More Mis

**AirborneSapper7** · 03-07-2012, 10:37 PM

Obama mulls giving Moscow data on missile defense

By Jim Wolf
Tue Mar 6, 2012 7:56pm EST

WASHINGTON, March 6 (Reuters) - The Obama administration disclosed on Tuesday that it is considering sharing some classified U.S. data as part of an effort to allay Russian concerns about a controversial antimissile shield.

The administration is continuing negotiations begun under former President George W. Bush on a defense technical cooperation agreement with Moscow that could include limited classified data, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Brad Roberts told a House of Representatives' Armed Services subcommittee.

He gave no details on the sort of data that might be shared under such an agreement.

Russia strongly opposes the U.S.-engineered bulwark being built in and around Europe against ballistic missiles that could be fired by countries like Iran.

Moscow fears that such a shield could grow strong enough over time to undermine Moscow's own nuclear deterrent force and has threatened to deploy missiles of its own as a counter.

"We're not the first administration to seek coooperation on missile defense," Roberts, who is responsible for nuclear and missile defense policy, told the subcommittee on strategic forces.

Nor is the administration the first "to believe that cooperation could be well-served by some limited sharing of classified information of a certain kind if the proper rules were in place to do that," he said in reply to questions from Mo Brooks, an Alabama Republican.

"The Bush administration headed down precisely the same path," Roberts said.

"We're making no progress" in persuading Russia to drop its opposition, despite the willingness to consider sharing certain sensitive data, he added.

The Obama administration is pursuing this cooperation because it would be in the security interests of the United States, NATO and Russia by strengthening the defensive capabilities of both NATO and Russia, Roberts said.

Under any such agreement, NATO would be responsible for the defense of its member states and Russia would be responsible for the defense of Russia, Roberts added in written testimony.

Army Lieutenant General Patrick O'Reilly, the head of the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency, said he had no knowledge of any move to share with Moscow any classified information on the U.S. technology used to knock out target missiles.

"I never received a request to release classified information to the Russians," he told the panel, testifying alongside Roberts.

Panel chairman Michael Turner said last November that he would oppose any Obama administration effort to provide Russia information on the so-called burnout velocity of Raytheon Co Standard Missile-3 interceptors, a key part of the layered defense.

"The House Armed Services Committee will vigorously resist such compromise of U.S. missile defense capabilities," he said in a speech last November.

Republicans who control the panel will back legislation that would bar the administration from transferring classified missile defense technology to Russia as part of any negotiations or for any other purpose, a congressional staff member said.

Obama mulls giving Moscow data on missile defense | Reuters

**AirborneSapper7** · 03-08-2012, 05:02 AM

China Secretly Seeks The High Ground

March 5, 2012: The American DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency, a military version of the CIA) believes that the Chinese space program involves more than the peaceful use of space. The DIA has discovered that the Chinese are working hard on jamming satellite signals and using lasers to damage satellites. All this is in addition to Chinese work on tracking satellites, a prerequisite for damaging or destroying them. All this is the result of greater scrutiny of the Chinese space program since 2007, when China unexpectedly tested a Killsat (killer satellite). The U.S. let China know that the Killsat test delivered a message. The U.S. responded a year later. The American shoot down of a failed photo satellite in February 2008, was a direct response to the Chinese use of an attack satellite to destroy one of their inoperable weather satellites in January 2007. The U.S. was alarmed at the Chinese satellite destruction test and wanted to let the Chinese know that there were American weapons available to do the job quicker and cheaper. What the U.S. didn't say, or didn't have to say, was that America was now keeping a very close eye on Chinese space warfare capabilities.

Meanwhile, the Chinese were duly impressed when, in early 2008, a U.S. Navy cruiser used its Aegis radar to locate the target, some 220 kilometers above, before firing a single SM-3 missile to destroy the truck sized satellite. To assist precisely locating the target, larger radars and telescopes were also used. This attack wasn't easy because the satellite was out of control and moving erratically. The orbit had to be predicted at least to the point where the Aegis warship could position itself under that orbit. That ability to overcome these difficulties was a good thing. If the Aegis anti-satellite weapon was to be used again, as in wartime, an enemy satellite might try to maneuver to avoid a shot from an Aegis equipped warship.

The 2008 shot took six weeks to plan, mainly because there were so many unknowns. Now, many of those unknowns are knowns and another shoot-down could be carried out more quickly. How quickly remains a secret. There were other surprises as well. When the nine kg (20 pound) missile warhead hit the satellite there was an unexpected explosion as the hydrazine fuel of the satellite ignited. The flames burned for over twenty seconds. The impact of the warhead (which is inert, just a chunk of metal) was more destructive than anticipated, breaking the satellite up into more, and smaller, pieces. That was good, as those tiny fragments are less likely to hurt anything it hits.

This all began back on January 11th, 2007, when China launched an anti-satellite system (a KillSat or Killer Satellite) that destroyed an old Chinese weather satellite, about 850 kilometers up. That's at the upper range of where most reconnaissance satellites hang out. The KillSat hit the weather bird and the result was several million fragments. Most of the pieces are tiny, at least 817 are truly dangerous (at least 10 cm/four inches long, wide, or in diameter).

What China did was, in terms of technology, something the U.S. and Russia had demonstrated over three decades ago. No big deal, unless you actually use it. While China has now demonstrated its ability to destroy satellites (at the cost of a launcher and a maneuverable KillSat), it has also caused a major stink among the dozens of nations that own, or use (usually via leasing arrangements) the several hundred satellites in orbit. That's because this Chinese test increased the amount of dangerous space debris by about eight percent. That's a lot. By common agreement, nations that put up satellites include the capability for the bird, once it has reached the end of its useful life, to slowly move closer to earth until it burns up as it enters the thicker atmosphere. This approach leaves no debris that can collide with other satellites behind. Even a small piece of satellite debris can, when hitting another satellite at high speed, destroy or fatally damage it.

A quarter century ago Russia and the United States agreed to halt such KillSat tests in order to reduce the amount of "space pollution" that threatened all current and future space satellites. Moreover, there was the practical problem of cost. Having launchers standing by to put a sufficient number of KillSats up would be enormously expensive. And it would simply encourage others to do the same thing, which would cancel the original anti-satellite effort. China has ignored, so far, any criticism of its KillSat test and dismissed the risk of starting an orbital arms race. But China has angered the other users of orbital space and earned the contempt of those nations as well. Now we know that it also compelled the United States to test one of its own anti-satellite weapons and a new one at that.

China is believed to have gone ahead and made preparations to assemble a force of 20-30 Killsat missiles, a force sufficient to cripple the American military satellite network. China denies all of this, which is the wise thing to do. It was impossible to hide the 2007 Killsat test and protests from other satellite owning nations were ignored. What China is not ignoring is the benefits of being able to fight in space.

Space: China Secretly Seeks The High Ground

**AirborneSapper7** · 03-16-2012, 03:17 AM

bttt

**AirborneSapper7** · 03-16-2012, 03:32 AM

Explosive new powerbase: Asia goes for broke with arms race

For the first time, the continent is spending more than Europe. But which nation will emerge strongest?

Andrew Buncombe, Clifford Coonan, Alexander Matthews Delhi, Beijing
Thursday 15 March 2012

Last week it was China that captured the headlines. This week, the attention is on India. Eleven days ago, the authorities in Beijing announced an 11.2 per cent increase in its military budget, a rise that was in line with those of the past decade and underscored the country's continuing emergence as a global power.

Click HERE to view graphic

Officials in Delhi are today expected to announce India's military budget for 2012-13. Last year, despite austerity measures in some areas, defence spending was increased by 11.6 per cent as India continued to modernise and expand its military capabilities. If – as is anticipated – there is another double-digit increase today, it will highlight the growing arms race that has gripped Asia as nations compete both with each other and the US, for local and regional influence.

The true scale of this arms race was underscored in a report issued last week by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) in London, which said arms spending by Asian nations will this year for the first time overtake that of European countries, where economic woes have forced constriction.

The organisation's annual military balance survey reported that in addition to India and China, Australia, Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam are all spending heavily.

"There are three reasons for this," said Rahul Roy-Chaudhary, of the IISS. "First, Asian economies are rising; second, there is a dynamic procurement process taking place in South-east Asia, south Asia and east Asia, and third, there is an economic crisis in Europe."

The various reasons behind individual countries military spending priorities may differ. But Mr Roy-Chaudhary said it was clear that was a strong element of inter-connectivity – China watched US spending, India and Japan watched China's spending and Pakistan watched India's military expansion.

"India doesn't formally say that its budget is determined by what China is doing, but part of it is," he added. "Pakistan cares about India."

And it is clear that the ripples wash all ways. If Beijing is ever anxious about Washington, last year, when President Barack Obama announced that US military spending in the Asia-Pacific would be protected from the squeezes faced by other parts of the Pentagon budget, it was seen as a response to China's mounting influence, particularly over the oceans.

Maritime concerns may be driving much regional military spending, say analysts, including China's purchase of its first ever aircraft carrier, the refurbished Soviet ship,Varyag, which, it was announced yesterday, will go into service later this year.

"What we see is an arms race among South-east Asian nations looking at China. There is a perceived threat there, in countries like Vietnam and the Philippines," said one defence analyst, who asked to remain anonymous.

While China has little interest in exporting socialism, aware that Soviet Russia collapsed because of its hang-ups on international socialism, it is very aggressive about the South China Sea. A former Filipino president, Fidel V Ramos, wrote this week that "Chinese global power and arms build-up, plus east Asia's economic gravitas, are driving neighbouring countries to boost defence spending".

Most disputes are focused on the Spratley Islands and the Paracel Islands, one of the most hotly contested territorial disputes in the world. Chinese forces seized the western Paracels from Vietnam in 1974 and sank three Vietnamese ships in 1988, events that have cast a shadow over relations since and are a potential flashpoint. China is unlikely to budge on these islands, because they provide cover and protect the route of the Chinese navy's nuclear submarines, which are stationed on Hainan Island, in the South China Sea.

However, everyone in the region seems to have a claim on the Spratleys, including China, Vietnam, Taiwan, Malaysia, Brunei, and the Philippines. "We see the disputes in the South China Sea as potentially the most pressing concern in terms of conflict in the region. It could be a spat over fishermen, or over an oil-drilling platform. The potential is always there, although it probably wouldn't develop into an open conflict," said Mr Roy-Chaudhary.

China is also active on dry land, spending more money in Tibet, not only on keeping the restive population there under control, but also on deploying more troops on the plateau at Tawang, near Arunachal Pradesh. China has a long-running border dispute with India over this area. The Chinese are deploying troops and aircraft and other equipment to the Himalayan area to see how they withstand the winter. In this arena, one that is particularly sensitive to India because it lost part of this territory to China during a 1962 war, Delhi has responded with men and machines.

"India has made more efforts to raise two mountain divisions, which you can say is a response to China," said Laxman Behera, of the Delhi-based Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis.

China's announcement earlier this month said that its military budget would be increased to $106bn (£68bn), from $95bn. Such an amount leaves it far behind the US, which in 2013 will have a military spend of $525bn, but considerably ahead of its regional rival India, which in 2012 allocated to $36bn to the military, around a third of it on salaries and benefits.

Many think China is probably spending even more but that it chooses not to reveal the true figure. Last year, the US suggested that Beijing's true military budget might be 60 per cent higher, at around $160bn. Some analysts, believe China's military spend could double in the next three years.

Chinese Defence Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng said last week that it was "quite normal" to upgrade the military in an era of rapidly developing technology. "Weapons and equipment development is undertaken to maintain national security. It does not target any specific country or objective," he said.

Explosive new powerbase: Asia goes for broke with arms race - Asia - World - The Independent