Monthly Archives: March 2020

1. Turkey is Learning Why NATO Membership Matters  Bloomberg
2. NATO should tell Turkey: 'Let's make a deal' | TheHill  The Hill
3. Idlib and a watershed moment for NATO-Turkey relations  Daily Sabah
4. Work with Turkey, NATO tells EU amid migrant crisis  EURACTIV
5. Why NATO should grit its teeth and help Turkey in Idlib  The Economist
6. View Full Coverage on Google News

Originally posted here:
Turkey is Learning Why NATO Membership Matters - Bloomberg

Naval Aircrewman (Operator) 3rd Class Ethan Mehring, assigned to the Skinny Dragons of Patrol Squadron (VP) 4, conducts flight operations aboard a squadron P-8A Poseidon aircraft during an during an anti-submarine warfare mission over the Mediterranean Sea, Feb. 19, 2020. VP-4 is currently forward deployed to the U.S. 6th Fleet area of operations and is assigned to Commander, Task Force 67, responsible for tactical control of deployed maritime patrol and reconnaissance squadrons throughout Europe and Africa. US Navy photo

NAVAL AIR STATION SIGONELLA, ITALY An increasingly sophisticated reconstruction and evaluation team is giving sailors in NATOs ongoing Dynamic Manta anti-submarine warfare exercise almost real-time feedback that helps them learn from any mistakes they make each day instead of waiting weeks or months for corrections.

An In-Stride Debriefing Team (IDT) set up at Naval Air Station Sigonella in Sicily is helping the participants in the air, surface and undersea domains understand each day what contributed to their success in finding the target submarine in that days serial, or if they didnt find the submarine, what opportunities they had to detect the sub and why they missed their target.

In some cases, the issue could be as simple as operating a sonar at the wrong depth in the water column, where a simple fix could help the team find success the next day. In other cases, the lessons learned may be more complicated but participants are finding out during the exercise while they can consult other experts and try to correct out their mistakes, whereas in other exercises they might not understand until weeks or months later what went wrong.

Normally during most exercises you dont get that sort of immediate feedback. So what Im hoping to see is maybe at the beginning of the exercise the people shaking the rust off, if you will, to at the end of the exercise they are feeling really that theyve gotten that feedback that they need in a real-time feedback loop such that their skillsets are improved, U.S. Rear Adm. Andrew Burcher, who commands submarines at NATOs Maritime Command (MARCOM), said during a press conference at sea during the Dynamic Manta 2020 kickoff.

Burcher likened the capability to a test where you can see the answer to the first question and know if you got it right or wrong before moving on to the second question.

That immediate feedback can help participants see if youve improved and understand where maybe your mistakes are. And thats incredibly important, because a lot of times in these exercises the ships, the assets dont know if they got the answer right until weeks later after theres been some feedback. So that real-time heres the answer to Question 1, this is how you did, lets take Question 2, is really important, he said.

A helicopter from Italian frigate ITS Carabiniere (F 593) lowers its dipping sonar into the Ionian Sea on Feb. 24, 2020, during an anti-warfare demonstration for media at the kickoff of NATO exercise Dynamic Manta. USNI News photo.

Peter Van Mierlo is leading the IDT, made up of 12 officers from 12 countries with a range of expertise and backgrounds. He has been involved in the effort to provide real-time lessons learned for 20 years, dating back to his time in uniform in the Royal Netherlands Navy.

Van Mierlo told reporters during the exercise that in 2000 he came to participate in Dynamic Manta for the first time, when the exercise had nine submarines and 40 maritime patrol aircraft missions that were flown but no surface ships at the time. He was told to collect all the data when the aircraft came back from their missions, and in sorting through stacks and stacks of papers from the exercise, he realized that 75 percent of the missions were cold the airplanes did not detect a submarine and the aircrews would have no way of knowing if there was just no submarine in their operating area or if they missed it due to a mistake they had made.

They were cold, and they dont know why, if they missed anything, he said.

He realized at the time that, with just a little more information on the submarines actual tracks, he could figure out what detection opportunities were missed and, with perhaps with a little more information, why.

Some tools were built for the 2001 exercise and have been improved upon since then, bringing answers to aircraft and ship crews within about 24 hours so they can apply lessons learned to the next serial in the exercise.

Todays feedback comes in the form of Power Point slides, where Van Mierlo and his team of experts map out snapshots of every 15 minutes or so, where the subs were versus anti-submarine warfare assets, and comments regarding what actions the crew took versus what they should have done.

The idea is that the [operations] officer takes that aboard ship, gets the whole team around it and talks his way through it and picks up on what went well and what could go better, to accelerate the lessons learned process, Van Mierlo said.

Some nations contributing to the IDT send experts on diesel submarines, and some send experts on ASW and this year, the U.S. Navy for the first time sent an expert on the lessons learned process.

Lt. Ryan Rapada, the ASW officer at the Afloat Training Group who was previously trained to be an anti-submarine/anti-surface warfare tactics instructor (WTI) through the Naval Surface and Mine Warfighting Development Center (SMWDC), is supporting this NATO exercise on behalf of SMWDC for the first time in the commands history.

Rapada told USNI News that SMWDC stresses the PBED process planning, briefing, executing and debriefing above all else as a way to improve proficiency quickly.

That is exactly what were doing here. So we receive the data, do the analysis and debrief, he said.Debrief is the most important part, thats how the guys get all their lessons learned. So we construct the PowerPoints, something that we vigorously did in the (SMWDC) schoolhouse, and then we get the chance to interact with the squadrons and the surface ships and submariners and sort of poke them to talk about what they did and how they can improve.

During Surface Warfare Advanced Tactical Training (SWATT) events hosted by SMWDC for ships preparing to deploy, the PBED process is enhanced by playback tools that allow operators to listen back to conversations on the bridge and re-look at what they could see on their screens at the time, to discuss in vivid detail what they knew and how they arrived at the decisions they made. The IDT at the NATO exercises does not have the playback tools but does recreate that to a degree in the PowerPoint slides, with detailed tracks, depth movements, detections, and commanders commentary on what tactical thinking drove their decisions.

Rapada said that some of his colleagues on the IDT have dedicated their careers to mastering ASW in a way that American sailors arent often able to do, as they might serve as an ASW Officer on a surface ship but then move onto another assignment with another focus area two years later. What he could bring, to supplement their deep subject matter knowledge, is an expertise on generating lessons learned and boosting crew proficiently on short timelines.

WTIs enter the fleet as warriors, thinkers, and teachers, Rapada told USNI News.Being part of Dynamic Manta, were constantly analyzing the tactics being used in each [combined ASW exercise] to provide lessons learned to all of the major players. During the debriefs, we have a chance to teach doctrine and help the participants from every community become a more lethal force.

Related

The rest is here:
NATO Evaluation Tool Points Out Training Mistakes in Almost Real-Time - USNI News

Italian submarine ITS Salvatore Todaro (S 526) and Canadian frigate HMCS Fredericton (FFH 337) sail in the Ionian Sea during an anti-submarine warfare demonstration for media on Feb. 24, 2020, during the kickoff of NATOs Dynamic Manta exercise. USNI News photo.

ABOARD ITS CARABINIERE, IN THE IONIAN SEA All across the Mediterranean Sea, more non-NATO countries are fielding submarines while NATO allies are increasing the size of their own undersea fleets. Those submarines are also becoming harder to find.

All told, the ability for NATO to find, track and identify submarines is not just a matter of defense against Russia, but a matter of basic traffic safety on and under the Mediterranean.

Set against the backdrop of the increasingly crowded Med, NATO is hosting the Dynamic Manta 2020 anti-submarine warfare exercise, bringing together nine nations to combine ASW capabilities from ships, maritime patrol aircraft, helicopters and submarines, and improve their ability to work together to keep these southern European waters safe.

Dynamic Manta was designed to train, to prepare, to test our ability in a very particular domain, that is the anti-submarine warfare, Italian Navy Rear Admiral Paolo Fantoni, who commands Standing NATO Maritime Group 2, said ahead of the kickoff of the exercise.All this to facilitate the integration of forces. That is the goal and the strength of NATO: the capability for the alliance to operate with different forces from different nations using the same standards and procedures, and to be able to react properly to any type of emergency.

SNMG-2 commands the surface forces in the exercises and is one of four very high readiness surface forces that NATO maintains under its Maritime Command (MARCOM).

Canadian frigate HMCS Fredericton (FFH 337) and a helicopter participate in an anti-submarine warfare demonstration for media on Feb. 24, 2020, at the kickoff of the NATO Dynamic Manta 2020 exercise. USNI News photo.

Fantoni told USNI News during an interview aboard SNMG-2 flagship ITS Carabiniere (F 593) that ASW is tough enough for one nation to do, but combining ships and aircraft from multiple countries is a challenge. Each bring different kinds of sensors onboard ships and aircraft of different ages and sophistication. For example, under his command is Italian frigate Carabiniere, an ASW-variant FREMM frigate that delivered to the fleet in 2015. Also in the task group is Hellenic Navy frigate HS Aegean (F 460), which was commissioned into the Royal Netherlands Navy in 1980, sold to Greece in 1993 and modernized in 2010. Fantoni said all the ships are trained to certain NATO standards before they are assigned to a NATO group like SNMG-2, but his job is to figure out how to make the most of the differing capabilities each ship brings.

We need to operate as a force not Carabiniere acting on her own and (Canadian frigate) Fredericton and the others on their own the ships are a part of the scenario for the interactions: they have to achieve some goals, to detect the submarines, to take some actions against the submarines, and vice versa to defend themselves, to defend a nearby unit from a submarine attack, he said, calling it a force-multiplier when they can share information and hunt a sub collectively rather than operating in proximity but independently.

Everyone involved in the exercise can perform some ASW, but some assets bring especially advanced capabilities: Carabiniere has a variable-depth sonar, some helos have a dipping sonar to supplement their airborne sensors, the fixed-wing planes have great endurance and range.

Its like an orchestra. I feel like, really, a director of an orchestra to use different instruments as much as they can contribute to my mission, Fantoni said.

In the complex undersea environment in the Mediterranean, squeezing out the most capability from SNMG-2 and the ships and aircraft it partners with during exercises like Dynamic Manta is key.

This August, Russia did Exercise Ocean Shield, which was the largest post end of the Cold War exercise conducted by Russia. And one of the components of [NATOs Supreme Allied Commander Europe]s guidance is that we conduct deterrence and defense of the Euro-Atlantic Area. The point of Dynamic Manta is to show a credible defense, that we have the ability to act interoperably within the ASW realm, Rear Adm. Andy Burcher, commander of NATO submarines at MARCOM, said during a press conference aboard Carabiniere on Feb. 24 the first day of the exercise.In addition to that, I would say that all of the large number of nations that surround the Mediterranean are increasing the number of submarines that are operating in the Mediterranean: Algeria, Egypt, Russia and Israel are now all operating submarines in the Mediterranean. And a large number of our NATO alliance countries are increasing their submarine footprint in the area: Spain, Italy, Turkey, I believe Greece, are all conducting expansion programs within the submarine realm. So from a submarine perspective, the number of submarines that are operating in the Mediterranean is increasing, so its important that we understand how the Mediterranean operates, and in particular, all of these submarines that are coming in have advanced capabilities in comparison to the past. So we have to stay both proficient and capable in the ASW realm. So those are the factors that I see in the Mediterranean that make this exercise important.

On Russia specifically, Fantoni said that, they are military vessels, they dont belong to the alliance, they are present so we could consider them as a threat, but I dont see a threat, an immediate threat to the forces. We respect their potential capability but also confident that we are as well prepared for any type of emergency.

A helicopter from Italian frigate ITS Carabiniere (F 593) lowers its dipping sonar into the Ionian Sea on Feb. 24, 2020, during an anti-warfare demonstration for media at the kickoff of NATO exercise Dynamic Manta. USNI News photo.

If the purpose of NATOs four standing maritime groups is to ensure theres always a task group integrated and ready to respond to an emergency, the purpose of exercises like Dynamic Manta and its sister exercise in the North Atlantic, Dynamic Mongoose, is to allow those task groups to prove their proficiency in specialized warfare areas.

Burcher said during the press conference that, if a war were to break out, NATO countries could bring a great number of submarines to the fight: 12 NATO countries have a combined 69 submarines, and though the U.S. Navy typically doesnt lend its submarines to NATO for tasking, it could bring about 30 Atlantic-based subs to the fight if the need arose. Those 100 subs, plus the frigates and destroyers and helicopters and maritime patrol aircraft that would supplement them in a hypothetical fight against the Russian submarine fleet, are all capable assets but integration only comes through practice. By rotating which nations are involved in the standing groups and which participate in exercises like Dynamic Manta, all nations are exposed to some amount of integrated theater ASW operations through NATO and are able to develop some sort of institutional knowledge.

In Dynamic Manta 2020, a series of CASEXs increase in complexity, from familiarization efforts up through a graduating event of coordinated theater ASW with air, surface and subsurface assets contributing to finding an enemy submarine, Burcher explained. Early on, a ship might be told that the target is in its operating box and be given its course and speed to see if it can positively find and identify the submarine with its systems; by the end, the ship might be told a target is within its operating box but it wont have any clues as to its location or course.

Four submarines are participating, with subs serving as targets as well as ASW assets. Nine countries total are involved, as well as NATOs Center for Maritime Research and Experimentation, which is bringing unmanned undersea vehicles and gliders to contribute to sub-hunting operations while also testing out the new gear and new tactics, which Burcher said brings in an extra added tool to the undersea fight.

A helicopter tracks Italian submarine ITS Salvatore Todaro (S 526) in the Ionian Sea on Feb. 24, 2020, during an anti-submarine warfare demonstration for media at the kickoff of the NATO Dynamic Manta 2020 exercise. USNI News photo.

Fantoni said MARCOM is constantly identifying gaps, noting lessons learned, testing out new concepts to fix those gaps, and then ultimately updating doctrine so NATO forces will train to the best and most relevant capabilities. Much of this is driven by ever-changing capabilities both in NATO assets as well as potential target submarines.

Technology is evolving very very quick, and of course we adapt our doctrine to the new capabilities. One basic example: if in the past your sensors were able to detect a submarine at 10 kilometers, and now your sensor allows you to detect beyond that limit, you need to adjust to how you intend to use the tactics that goes behind it, Fantoni told USNI News.But also the submarines are getting new technology, so we change on a yearly basis from exercise to exercise.

Dynamic Manta takes place in the Ionian Sea, in the Central Mediterranean in waters with relatively less commercial shipping traffic. Dynamic Mongoose takes place in Northern Europe, typically rotating between the Norwegian Sea and the North Atlantic Ocean to allow northern NATO navies to practice in shallower waters and in the deep ocean.

Fantoni called Dynamic Manta and Mongoose two of the most interesting and viable activities and represent today the highest level of integration of forces in anti-submarine warfare. Very beneficial to surface vessels, for maritime patrol aircraft, and indeed for the submarines.

Submarines are constantly improving their stealth, their quietness. They are improving in their tactics and the sensors that they have, and so these types of exercises allow us to really put theory to practice and make sure that we understand what were doing in a highly complex environment, Burcher said.Because anti-submarine warfare requires both air, surface and submarine assets to detect the other submarines, its important that we learn how to and we practice in a combined environment.

Related

View original post here:
NATO Trains For Submarine Warfare As More Attack Boats Prowl the Med - USNI News

Russian submarines are deploying farther, in greater numbers, than at any time since the end of the Cold War. The undersea surge has prompted NATO to initiate a surge of its own, launching large numbers of maritime patrol planes to find, track and practice sinking the Russian boats.

But theres evidence Russia is doing the same thing, sending its own patrol planes farther south than they normally fly.

The escalating deployments point to growing readiness for war on both sides.

British and Norwegian Typhoon and F-16 fighter jets scrambled two times in late February 2020 to intercept pairs of Tu-142 patrol planes belonging to Russias Northern Fleet after the Tu-142s flew farther south than normal and approaches Norwegian air space.

These Russian aircraft operate relatively routinely over the seas north of Norway, Maj. Brynjar Stordal, a spokesperson for the Norwegian armed forces, told The Barents Observer. It is not common that they fly as far south as they did this week.

The Russian planes flew over the Barents Sea north of the Kola Peninsula before turning south into the so-called Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom Gap, a maritime chokepoint in the North Atlantic.

Breaking through the GIUK gap in a potential conflict would be important for the Russian navy when establishing the bastion defense concept, protecting the ballistic missile submarines patrolling in the Barents Sea and Arctic Ocean, The Barents Observer explained.

The Tu-142 flights coincided with the beginning of a major NATO exercise in Norway. Exercise Cold Response involved 15,000 alliance troops from nine countries.

We have experienced in the past that allied exercise activities in out neighborhoods has led to some increased activity from Russian surveillance capacities like this, Stordal said.

NATO isnt alone in staging large-scale war games. The Russian navy in mid-October 2019 sortied eight subs in the countrys biggest undersea exercise since the Cold War.

The eight submarines, including six nuclear-powered ships, sailed from their bases in northern Russia into the cold waters of the Barents and Norwegian Seas. At the same time, an additional two boats -- the nuclear-powered Sierra-class attack submarines Pskov and Nizhny Novgorod -- sailed into roughly the same waters for tests and training.

The 10 vessels represent around 20 percent of the Russian submarine force. For comparison, the U.S. Pacific Fleet with its roughly 30 subs as recently as 2013 reliably could deploy eight boats on short notice.

More than a dozen NATO patrol planes flew back-to-back missions in order to find and track Moscows submarines. Amatuer plane-spotters using commercial software kept tabs on the planes transponders.

Its unclear how many NATO submarines also joined the hunt for the Russian boats.

Between Oct. 25 and Nov. 7, 2019, the NATO planes flew more than 40 missions. Six Norwegian air force P-3s, four U.S. Navy P-8s and a Canadian air force CP-140 flew from Andoya in Norway. At least one additional P-8 flew from Keflavik in Iceland. A French navy Atlantic 2 patroller staged from Prestwick airport in Scotland.

Russian submarines also have extended their patrols across the Atlantic to the U.S. East Coast. In response, the U.S. fleet in March 2020 is doing something it hasnt done in decades. Practicing to protect convoys.

The Navy is exercising a contested cross-Atlantic convoy operation for the first time since the end of the Cold War, using a carrier strike group to pave the way for sealift ships with a cruiser escort to bring the Army ground equipment for the Defender-20 exercise, USNI News reported.

The nuclear-powered supercarrier USS Eisenhower is leading the current convoy exercise. The Ike, along with an unidentified submarine sweeping the depths of the ocean for unexpected Russian guests, is participating in an exercise that will throw simulated attacks at the convoy to stress test how prepared the Navy is to punch its way across the Atlantic, Breaking Defense explained.

But NATO isnt the only one preparing for undersea warfare, as the spike in Russian aerial patrols indicate.

David Axe serves as Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is theauthor of the graphic novelsWar Fix,War Is BoringandMachete Squad.

Here is the original post:
Putin Is Pushing: NATO Jets Are Scrambling to Intercept Russian Patrol Planes - The National Interest Online

Temperatures were dropping to below minus 20 degrees celsius in parts of northern Norway as up to 16,000 troops from ten countries on 2nd March started the Cold Response 2020.

It is Norways biggest allied exercise and the countrys Armed Forces have been preparing intensively for months.

For sixteen days military men and women backed by heavy hardware will fight their way across deep snow and harsh climate conditions. For Norway, cold weather fighting is considered field of top expertise and the country has made Arctic operations its special contribution to NATO.

According to the Norwegian military, the main purpose of the Cold Response 2020 is to conduct multinational joint exercises with a high-intensity combat scenario in demanding winter conditions.

Of big importance is also joint training with large amphibious capacities, the countrys Armed Forces inform.

The training ground covers major parts of northern Norway, except areas close to the Russian border. A key role in the drills are given to the newly formed Finnmark Land Defense, a unit based in Porsanger.

These forces, along with supporting troops from the Sr-Varanger border guards, as well as units from the Finnish, Swedish and British armed forces, will play the role as attacking enemy in the exercise scenario.

The attacking forces will advance on theBrigade North, the more south-based troops that subsequently will request support from NATO units.

This is a milestone in the build-up and development of the Finnmark Land Defense, says Jan Marius Nilsen, Head of the countrys Border Guards.

The Finnmark Land Defense has been a key priority in the development of Norways Arctic capacities. By year 2022, a full-fledged cavalry battalion with about 400 soldiers will be based in Porsanger, the military base located near the town of Lakselv in northern Norway.

Included in the military buildup is also a new 200 soldiers strong Ranger Company at the Garrison of Sr-Varanger, based on the border to Russia.

Included in the drills are heavy military hardware, including ships, aircraft and armored vehicles and tanks.

The exercise was originally to include a bigger number of American troops. However, up to 3,000 U.S. soldiers were ultimately instead sent to engagements in the Middle East.

The Cold Response 2020 still includes a significant number of Americans that will engage alongside Norwegians, British, Dutch, German, French, Danish, as well as Swedish and Finnish troops.

The number of foreign forces will total about 6,000.

Military observers from neighboring Russia are invited to attend parts of the exercise along with observers from a number of more countries.

Russia has on repeated occasions expressed dislike with the bi-annual NATO exercise and has explicitly displayedits presence in the region ahead of the drills.

On February 26th and 27th, two Tu-142 planes from the Russian Northern Fleet flew far south along the Norwegian coast.

The planes came out over the Barents Sea north of the Kola Peninsula, continued to west of the North Cape before heading south deep into the so-called GIUK gap (Greenland-Iceland-UK), the area in the northern Atlantic that forms a naval choke point.

Russia has also carefully planned its own exercise activity to match with the NATO training.

In the last days of February, the Northern Fleet conducted combat training at the Shary shooting range just few kilometers from the border to Norway

Here is the original post:
Freezing cold as 16000 NATO soldiers kickstart Arctic war game - The Independent Barents Observer

With an election coming up in November, Trump is keen to make good on pledge to end America's longest war, but observers say it appears the Taliban have yet to be convinced to come to the negotiating table with Kabul.

Western forces will only leave Afghanistan if the Taliban make good on their commitment to reduce bloodshed, the head of NATO warned Wednesday, as attacks surge.

The militants have ramped up violence against Afghan forces since signing a deal with Washington at the weekend, casting doubt over peace talks between Kabul and the Taliban, due to begin on March 10.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told AFP that a "long and hard" road to peace lay ahead but warned the Taliban that if they reneged on the agreement, foreign forces would not leave.

"It is a very difficult situation and Taliban must honour their commitment. We need to see reduction in violence," Stoltenberg told AFP in an interview in Zagreb, where he attended a meeting of EU defence ministers.

"We can only deliver our side of the deal if Taliban deliver their side of the deal."

US President Donald Trump has touted the deal, signed in Doha, as a way to end the bloody 18-year US military presence in Afghanistan.

But overnight, Taliban militants killed at least 20 Afghan soldiers and policemen in a string of attacks in the latest breach of the partial truce.

Under the terms of the deal, US and other foreign forces will quit Afghanistan within 14 months, subject to Taliban security guarantees and a pledge by the insurgents to hold talks with the government of President Ashraf Ghani.

'No alternative'

NATO, which has a 16,000-strong training and support mission in Afghanistan, has long insisted it would only leave when conditions were right in particular that terrorists could not use the country as a springboard for attacks abroad.

"The agreement that was signed on Saturday was an important first step, but it's only a first step," said Stoltenberg, who as prime minister of Norway sent troops to Afghanistan following the US-led invasion that overthrew the Taliban in 2001.

"The road towards peace will be long and hard and we have to be prepared for disappointments."

"At the same time there is no alternative. The only way to have a peaceful solution is a negotiated agreement and to talk to Taliban."

With an election coming up in November, Trump is keen to make good on pledge to end America's longest war, but observers say it appears the Taliban have yet to be convinced to come to the negotiating table with Kabul.

Barely three days after signing the partial truce deal, the Taliban announced they were resuming their offensive against Afghan government forces.

In a sign of their intent, the militants have mounted 30 attacks in 15 of the country's 34 provinces in the space of 24 hours, according to the Afghan interior ministry.

Source: AFP

Read the original post:
NATO chief warns of hard road to Afghan peace as violence soars - TRT World

CRISIS POINT: Ambassadors from all 29 NATO nations met in emergency session in Brussels this morning, after Turkey invoked Article 4 of the alliance treaty. Under Article 4 of the Treaty, any ally can request consultations whenever, in the opinion of any of them, their territorial integrity, political independence or security is threatened, NATO said in a statement.

Turkey is calling on world powers to impose a no-fly zone over northern Syria after regime airstrikes in the Idlib region killed 33 Turkish troops Thursday, and worsened a humanitarian crisis that has displaced hundreds of thousands of people. Its the highest death toll for Turkish forces since they first moved into Syria in 2016.

Turkey has been trying to block the Russian-backed Syrian government offensive which is aimed at capturing the last major rebel stronghold. The brutal military campaign has targeted hospitals and schools, and has worsened the misery of thousands of civilians fleeing the fighting.

NO-FLY, NO GO: When NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg emerged from the meeting shortly after 6 a.m. Washington time, he made no mention of any no-fly zone, but said the NATO allies expressed their full solidarity and condemned the continued indiscriminate airstrikes by the Syrian regime and Russia in Idlib province.

I call on them to stop their offensive, to respect international law and to back U.N. efforts for a peaceful solution, he said.

REFUGEES ON THE MOVE: Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has ordered his border forces to stand down and allow refugees to cross into Turkey, and a senior Turkish official says Ankara would no longer stop Syrian refugees from reaching Europe, according to Reuters.

The move was applauded by Refugees International, which advocates on behalf of displaced people. If true, the move could provide a lifeline for the hundreds of thousands of desperate Syrians fleeing a brutal and condemnable Syrian and Russian offensive in Idlib, said the groups president, Eric Schwartz. And we would urge Turkey not to impose an arbitrary deadline on those seeking to escape the Russian-Syrian kill box.

Turkey has already taken in more than 3.6 million Syrian refugees, and says it will not stop the new arrivals from moving on to Europe and other destinations.

All refugees should enjoy freedom of movement, but we are also deeply concerned that those leaving Turkey will face a perilous journey across the sea to Greece a journey that has claimed so many lives, said Schwartz The Greek government will need to move quickly to rescue and receive refugees that make the crossing.

THE WORLD IS SITTING ON ITS HANDS: South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a stalwart defender of President Trump, yesterday supported Turkeys no-fly zone request, and called on Trump to act quickly.

Mr. President: it is in our national security interest to stop the slaughter and get ahead of a humanitarian crisis that could see millions of additional refugees flow out of Syria, creating further chaos, Graham said in a statement.

The world is sitting on its hands and watching the destruction of Idlib by Assad, Iran, and the Russians. This is one of the greatest humanitarian disasters in decades and the brutal aggression of Assad supported by Iran and Russia needs to come to an end, Graham said.

I very much appreciate Turkeys intervention in Idlib. It is now time for the international community to establish a no-fly zone to save thousands of innocent men, women, and children from a horrible death.

ESPER ENGAGED: At the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Mark Esper consulted with his Turkish counterpart, Hulusi Akar, by phone.

The two leaders discussed the Assad regime's brutal aggression in Idlib, which is backed by Russia and Iran; the resulting humanitarian crisis in Northwest Syria; and Libya, said a Pentagon read-out of the call. As President Trump said on Tuesday, and as discussed in today's call, we are exploring ways the United States can work together with Turkey and the international community.

RUSSIA DENIES ROLE: The Russian Defence Ministry claimed Turkish troops were hit by artillery fire, not airstrikes, and said the Turkish forces were collocated with rebel fighters and shouldnt have been there.

The Russian news agency RIA said Turkey had failed to notify Moscow of the presence of Turkish troops in the area despite being in regular communication with the Russian military.

MESSAGE TO ERDOGAN: As the news was breaking yesterday, U.S. Ambassador to NATO Kay Bailey Hutchison was briefing reporters at the State Department. As she waited for details of the attack she said one thing was clear: The U.S. not Russia is Turkeys true friend.

This is a big development, and our alliance is with Turkey. It is not with Russia; it is with Turkey. We want Turkey to understand that we are the one that theyve been allied with. Theyre in all of the missions that we have.

Good Friday morning and welcome to Jamie McIntyres Daily on Defense, written and compiled by Washington Examiner National Security Senior Writer Jamie McIntyre (@jamiejmcintyre) and edited by Susan Katz Keating (@SKatzKeating). Email here with tips, suggestions, calendar items, and anything else. Sign up or read current and back issues at DailyonDefense.com. If signing up doesnt work, shoot us an email and well add you to our list. And be sure to follow us on Twitter: @dailyondefense.

Subscribe today to the Washington Examiner magazine and get Washington Briefing: politics and policy stories that will keep you up to date with what's going on in Washington. SUBSCRIBE NOW: Just $1.00 an issue!

HAPPENING TODAY: Acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly discusses "How a Modernized Navy will Compete with China and Russia, with Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, at 9 a.m. See calendar below.

355 SHIPS IN 10 YEARS: At yesterdays House Armed Services Committee hearing, Modly insisted that despite proposed cuts in the Navys shipbuilding budget for FY 2021, he anticipated meeting the goal of 355 ship fleet in 10 years.

While this budget does slow our trajectory to a force of 355 ships or more, it does not arrest it, Modly testified. You have my personal assurance that we are still deeply committed to building that larger, more capable, more distributed naval force within what I consider a strategic relevant timeframe of no more than 10 years.

Committee chairman, Democrat Rep. Adam Smith was highly skeptical of the pledge. It's almost meaningless at this point, since it's like 20, 30 years out, he said. It's great to have goals, I suppose, and we can aspire towards that number. But at the point -- at this point, it seems like just that, an aspiration.

LOSING A SUB: Modly was quizzed by Smith about the decision of the Pentagon to move money that would have paid for a second Virginia-class attack submarine to boost funding for the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Well, to be frank, it's not helpful because it takes a ship out of a plan that we're driving towards, said Modley. It particularly is harmful in the sense that it takes a ship out of a category of ship for which we're going to have a hard time getting to anyway.

The need for new attack submarines is considered a critical component of the Navys future strategy, and Modly admitted the current plan doesnt quite get where the Navy wants to be. We feel like we need to have at least 66 attack submarines. Even on the 10-year trajectory, based on industrial base capacity, we think we can get to about 49 or 50, he said So it takes out one. If we can get to 48 instead of 49, that impacts that number.

NOT IN THE ROOM WHERE IT HAPPENED: Pressed by California Democrat Rep. Susan Davis, Chief of Naval Operation Adm. Michael Gilday admitted he was not consulted about the decision to forgo a submarine for more nuclear funding.

I was not directly involved in those discussions, he testified. It happened at budget endgame very quickly and we were informed after the decision was made.

IRANS TORTURE TV: The Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies is out with a new report that documents the Iranian regimes use of torture and forced confessions on its state-run media network.

To coerce political prisoners into appearing on camera and falsely admitting to contrived crimes, interrogators often beat prisoners with cables, sometimes to the point of paralysis; hold prisoners in solitary confinement for years; or threaten forced injections of hallucinogenic drugs, write authors Toby Dershowitz and Talia Katz. In using forced confessions, Iranian state media violate human rights of the innocent, demonize minority groups, delegitimize dissidents, and frame dual-nationals for contrived crimes.

The report calls for sanctions to be placed on the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting network, noting IRIB reporters are actually the interrogators who extracted the forced confessions.

Washington Examiner: Americas new nukes: Better not bigger

Defense One: A New Nuclear Warhead? STRATCOM Chief Cant Answer Yes Or No

Washington Examiner: Pompeo on anniversary of Russia's 'unprovoked invasion': Crimea belongs to Ukraine

Washington Examiner: Adam Schiff asks acting spy chief Richard Grenell to declassify documents related to Khashoggi killing

USNI News: Coronavirus Concerns Prompt PACFLEET To Impose 14-Day Gap Between Port Visits

Military.com: CENTCOM Limits Troop Travel In Middle East Due To Coronavirus Fears

Breaking Defense: Navy & Marines Caught By Surprise By Espers Budget Cuts

Military.com: More Marine Corps Personnel Cuts Are Coming, Commandant Says

Defense News: Expect Congress To Block Africa Troop Cuts, Says Defense Panel Chairman

AP: Afghans view US-Taliban deal with well-earned skepticism

Washington Post: Recent calm lets Afghans envisage a peaceful life Amid respite from fighting, Afghans glimpse peace

McClatchy: Congressman who also served at toxic black goo base reveals his own cancer fight

Washington Examiner: 'Our Agent Orange': Veterans who served at toxic Uzbekistan base want help from Congress

New York Times: U.S. Maintains Pressure On Iran, Stalling Diplomacy While Expecting Attacks

Stars and Stripes: U.S. Military Gives South Korean Employees One Month Notice On Unpaid Leave

Washington Post: Inspector general to probe whether VA chief Wilkie tried to discredit Democratic aide who reported sexual assault

AP: Grandfather, Navy vet among 5 victims of Wisconsin shooting

FRIDAY | FEBRUARY 28

8 a.m. Orlando, Fl. Day three of the Air Force Association 2020 Air Warfare Symposium, with, Will Roper, assistant secretary of the Air Force for Acquisition, Technology And Logistics; Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett; Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein; and Elon Musk, SpaceX Chief Engineer and Lt. Gen. John Thompson, commander, Space and Missile Systems Center. Agenda at https://www.afa.org/events/airwarfare/agenda

9 a.m. 1775 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Brookings Institution discussion: "How a Modernized Navy will Compete with China and Russia, with acting Navy Secretary Thomas Modly, and Michael O'Hanlon, senior fellow at Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/events

9 a.m. 201 Waterfront St., National Harbor, Md. The American Conservative Union holds its annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). Agenda: http://cpac.conservative.org/agenda

5 p.m. 1521 16th St. N.W. Institute of World Politics book discussion on "To Catch a Spy: The Art of Counterintelligence," with author Jim Olson, former chief of CIA counterintelligence. https://www.iwp.edu/events

MONDAY | MARCH 2

10 a.m. 1775 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Brookings Institution discussion: Congress and defense policy: A conversation with Rep. Mac Thornberry, R-Texas. https://www.brookings.edu/events

10 a.m. 1775 Massachusetts Ave. N.W. Brookings Institution discussion: Defending NATOs eastern flank: A conversation on Russia with Estonias minister of defense, with Jri Luik Estonian MoD. https://www.brookings.edu/events

TUESDAY | MARCH 3

10:30 a.m. 2118 Rayburn House Armed Services Committee hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the Department of the Army, with testimony from Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy and Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville. https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

2 p.m. 2118 Rayburn House Armed Services Subcommittee on Readiness hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 Air Force and Space Force Readiness Posture, with testimony from Shon Manasco, acting undersecretary of the Air Force; Gen. Stephen Wilson, Air Force vice chief of staff; and Lt. Gen. David Thompson, vice commander, U.S. Space Force. https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

2:30 p.m. 2212 Rayburn House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for Nuclear Forces and Atomic Energy Defense Activities, with testimony from Lisa Gordon-Hagerty, administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration; Victorino Mercado, performing the duties of assistant secretary of defense for strategy, plans, and capabilities; Vice Adm. Johnny Wolfe, Navy director, Strategic Systems Programs; Air Force Lt. Gen. Richard Clark, deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration; and Allison Bawden, director, natural resources and environment team, Government Accountability Office. https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

WEDNESDAY | MARCH 4

9 a.m. 1300 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W. McAleese Defense Programs Conference, with national security adviser Robert OBrien; Ellen Lord, undersecretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment; Michael Griffin, undersecretary of defense for research and engineering; Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, and more than a dozen others. https://www.mcaleese.com/events

10 a.m. 2118 Rayburn House Armed Services Committee hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 National Defense Authorization Budget Request for the Department of the Air Force, with testimony from Air Force Secretary Barbara Barrett; Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein; Gen. John Raymond, chief of space operations, U.S. Space Force. https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

2:30 p.m. 2212 Rayburn House Armed Services Subcommittee on Intelligence and Emerging Threats and Capabilities hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 Budget Request for U.S. Cyber Command and Operations in Cyberspace, with testimony from Kenneth Rapuano, assistant secretary of defense for homeland defense and global security; and U.S. Cyber Commander and National Security Agency Director Army Gen. Paul Nakasone. https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

2:30 p.m. 1030 15th St. N.W. Center for the National Interest and the Eurasia Center debate: Why should the US care about Ukraine? with Will Ruger, vice president for research and policy at the Charles Koch Institute; and Alina Polyakova, president & CEO of the Center for European Policy Analysis. The moderators are Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of The National Interest; and Melinda Haring, deputy director of the Eurasia Center. Register at : https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/event

9:30 p.m. ET Hoover Institution, Stanford, Ca. Intelligence Squared U.S. debates "The Maximum Pressure Campaign Against Iran Is Working, with former national security adviser retired Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster and Military Historian Victor Davis Hanson arguing for the proposition and Martha Crenshaw, terrorism studies expert and Abbas Milani of the Iran Democracy Project arguing against. Streamed live at https://www.intelligencesquaredus.org/debates

THURSDAY | MARCH 5

9:30 a.m. 2212 Rayburn House Armed Services Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Hearing: The Fiscal Year 2021 Army and Marine Corps Ground Modernization Programs, with testimony from Bruce Jette, assistant secretary of the army for acquisition, logistics and technology; Gen. John Murray, commanding general, Army Futures Command; Lt. Gen. Eric Smith, commanding general, Marine Corps Combat Development Command; and James Geurts, assistant secretary of the navy for research, development, and acquisition https://armedservices.house.gov/hearings

This dangerous situation must be deescalated to avoid further worsening of the horrendous humanitarian situation in the region, and to allow urgent humanitarian access for those trapped in Idlib. We urge an immediate return to the 2018 ceasefire.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, after an urgent meeting called by Turkey to discuss the escalating crisis in Syria

Read more here:
NATO convenes urgent session as Turkey calls for no-fly zone over northern Syria after airstrikes kill 33 Turkish troops - Washington Examiner

B61 in an underground Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3) vault at Volkel Air Base, Netherlands (Source: US Air Force/Wiki Commons)

Various NATO member-states have long contributed to the Cold War-era alliance by playing host to US nuclear weapons, as part of a special arrangement in which nuclear sharing is a core principle of the collective defence and deterrence with conversation about developing Australias deterrence, is it time to follow suit?

Australia's earliest strategic relationship with the British Empire established a foundation of dependence that would characterise all of the nation's future defence and national security relationships both in the Indo-Pacific and the wider world.

As British power slowly declined following the First World War and the US emerged as the pre-eminent economic, political and strategic power during the Second World War Australia became dependent on 'Pax Americana', or the American Peace.

Recognising this, Australia's strategic and defence planning has been intrinsically defined and impacted by a number of different, yet interconnected and increasingly complex factors, namely:

These factors have formed the basis of Australia's deterrence doctrine, depending upon larger, "great and powerful" friends to provide the real strategic deterrence to Australia's ad hoc tactical deterrence capabilities.

While conventional power projection capabilities alongside economic and soft power deterrence plays a role in this balancing act, the nuclear umbrella provided by theUS and, to a smaller degree, theUK has provided Australia with a greater degree of security in the face of potentialregional adversaries.

Despite thecollapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War cementing America's position as the pre-eminent world power this period was relatively short lived as costly engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq, peace-keeping interventions in southern Europe and enduring global security responsibilities have drained American 'blood' and 'treasure'.

In doing so, these expeditions have served to erode the domestic political, economic and strategic resolve and capacity of the US to unilaterally counter the rise of totalitarian regimes and peer competitors in both China and Russia.

NATO's nuclear sharing paradigm

While Australia has long been recognised as a global middle power, straddling the line between lower tier and global power, nuclear weapons and nuclear energy have remained highly contentious. Looking more broadly, many of Australia's NATO contemporaries seem to have fewer compunctions about both nuclear energy and, critically, nuclear ordnance.

As part of the NATO agreement, theUS has provided European NATO allies with a successive series of nuclear ordnance options across bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy and, up until recently, Turkey as a means of providing a tactical and strategic deterrence to potential Soviet aggression.

Looking further abroad, but still within the confines of the NATO alliance structure, Australia's Commonwealth 'cousin' Canada has a history of sharing nuclear ordnance with both theUS and the UK, largely through the auspice of the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD).

Canadian military units deployed to Europe throughout the Cold War frequently hosted a range of American and British nuclear ordnance, ranging from the B57 tactical nuclear weapon, which was deployed with the Canadian Air Force's CF-104s in Germany, through to the MGR-1 Honest John with a 1-kiloton W31 nuclear warhead.

Additionally, Belgium, Italy andGermany all continue to partake in the NATO nuclear weapons sharing program, with the modern B61 nuclear weapons divided between a range of facilities, for deployment upon existing tactical strike aircraft including the Belgian Air Force's F-16s and future F-35 Joint Strike Fighters, the German and Italian Eurofighter and the Panavia Tornado aircraft.

The rollout of the next-generation of the B61 weapons system, the Mod 12, will also see the platform integrated with the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter fleet to be deployed across US and NATO-allies in Europe.

NATO's distributed nuclear deterrence strategy is based on what Dr Karl-Heinz Kamp and US Air Force Major General (Ret'd)Robertus Remkesdescribe as, "The logic of nuclear deterrence is to change the risk calculation of a potential aggressor by threatening unacceptable damage through nuclear retaliation.

"In that sense, a nuclear posture sends the political message to an opponent or potential attacker that they cannot expect any gain or benefit from their aggression beingsufficient to justify the nuclear devastation they will suffer on their own territory."

This stratagem fits in line with recent conversations launched byMarcus Hellyer, the Australian Strategic Policy Institute's (ASPI) senior analyst for defence economics and capability, beginning with'Deterrence and long-range strike capability for Australia',in which he begins to debate the options available to Australia.

It is pivotal to identify that Hellyer does not in anyway articulate the development and introduction of an independent Australian nuclear arsenal (at least not yet anyway).

However,Hellyer's core driving force behind the radical shift in thinking regarding the introduction of an Australian long-range deterrent is based on the fact that "we could no longer take American military primacy for granted".

Crossing the "nuclear Rubicon"

Enter widely respected Australian strategic and defence policy analyst Hugh White, who recently kicked the hornets nest of debate with his new book,How to Defend Australia, and a series of supportingopinion pieces.

White set the scene for the Australian public, presenting perhaps one of the most asinine questions of recent strategic debate:

"Should Australia defend itself? Our choice is not an easy one. Just because we probably can build the forces to defend ourselves does not mean we necessarily should. As we have seen, the costs would be very high, and it is not a foregone conclusion that the benefits outweigh those costs."

While this represents a quick summary of White's proposal, it broadly encapsulates his modus operandi that is the path of least resistance and a belief that Australia is incapable of affecting its own future.

However, his most controversial option, the possibility of Australia developing or acquiring a domestic nuclear capability, remains an interesting conundrum for Australia's political and strategic leaders and public to consider as the region we are increasingly dependent upon continues to evolve and challenge our preconceptions of how we think the world should work.

While floating the idea,White specifically states he "neither predicts nor advocates" for the development of a domestic nuclear arsenal, yet it has been met with increasing debate and dialogue, with many taking to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute to discuss the options and the very idea of Australia's own nuclear arsenal, and the supporting doctrine required.

A key component of this discussion is reshaping the debate, ASPI senior fellow Rod Lyon clearly articulates this in what he describes as"crossing the nuclear Rubicon":

Lyon also goes on to expand onWhite's central premise for considering an Australian nuclear option, what White calls "nuclear blackmail", defined more simply as nuclear coercion by a nuclear armed and conventionally well-equipped great power, providing examples of Chinese, Indian, Pakistani and, most relevant for Australia, French concepts of 'minimum deterrence'.

Lyon states the French Cold War nuclear doctrine, which "called for an arsenal that could rip the arm off a superpower, leaving it an amputee among its more able-bodied peers", fits in well with Australia's existing conventional doctrine, which is focused on controlling the sea-air gap and limiting a hostile nation's attempts to coerce the otherwise isolated nation.

Building on this, Lyonarticulates: "So, should Australia build its own nuclear arsenal? I think the answer is, Yes, if it needs to. Thats a big if indeed, a series of big ifs: if the regional strategic environment becomes appreciably darker; if US extended nuclear deterrence is no longer available, or patently incredible; and, perhaps just as importantly, if theres bipartisan Australian acceptance of the need for an indigenous arsenal."

Leased nuclear weapons or a model based on France or Israel? Or a little from column A and a little from column B?

Lyon's French option is one that requires closer consideration and study as France's nuclear doctrine is dependent upon large, nuclear-powered, ballistic missile submarines that serve as a continuous-at-sea-deterrence doctrine similar to the model used by the British Royal Navy and its own nuclear deterrence strategy.

Shifting to the Middle East, Israel, while not a 'declared' nuclear weapons state (NWS), received early support from France and has an estimated arsenal of between 80 and 400 warheads spread across free-fall nuclear bombs, submarine-launched cruise missiles stationed onboard their fleet of five, modified, German designed and built Dolphin Class conventional submarines and the Jericho series of intermediate to intercontinental range ballistic missiles.

Both the French and Israeli models provide interesting concepts for Australian consideration, should the nation seek to pursue a domestic nuclear arsenal particularly the submarine leg of their respective nuclear deterrence forces could be extrapolated for implementation on Australia's existing Collins Class and future Attack Class vessels to serve as an Australian force multiplier and strategic leveller in the face of a rapidly evolving regional order.

It is important to recognise that any decision to acquire or develop nuclear weapons is not an easy decision to make and should not be taken lightly and should be done in full view of the Australian public following the presentation of the facts for the public's consideration.

Your thoughts

Long-range tactical and strategic deterrence capabilities combined with the qualitative edge of Australian personnel and technological advantages of these platforms, ensured Australia unrestrictedregional dominance against all but the largest peer competitors.

The rapidly evolving regional environment requires a renewed focus on developing a credible, future-proofed long-range strike capability for theRAAF and RAN to serve as critical components in the development of atruly 'joint force' Australian Defence Force capable of supporting and enhancing the nation's strategic engagement and relationships in the region.

For Australia, a nation defined bythis relationship with traditionally larger, yet economically weaker regional neighbours, the growing economic prosperity of the region and corresponding arms build-up, combined with ancient and more recent enmities, competing geopolitical, economic and strategic interests, places the nation at the centre of the 21st century's 'great game'.

Enhancing Australias capacity to act as an independent power, incorporating great power-style strategic economic, diplomatic and military capability serves as a powerful symbol of Australias sovereignty and evolving responsibilities in supporting and enhancing the security and prosperity of Indo-Pacific Asia.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia's future role and position in the Indo-Pacific and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms ofshaking up the nation's approach to our regional partners.

We would also like to hear your thoughts on the avenues Australia should pursue to support long-term economic growth and development in support of national security in the comments section below, or get in touch withThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.or atThis email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..

Following the NATO precedent? The nuclear-weapon sharing option

Originally posted here:
Following the NATO precedent? The nuclear-weapon sharing option - Defence Connect