Manuel Valls a réitéré ce mardi la promesse gouvernementale de veiller au choix du repreneur des emblématiques chantiers navals de Saint-Nazaire (Loire-Atlantique), mis en vente par le constructeur sud-coréen en difficulté STX.
IAI’s Bird-Eye 650D:
Recent Russian aggression in the Ukraine has sharpened Poland’s awareness of its status as NATO’s new linchpin state, and an ambitious 10-year military Technical Modernization Program (TMP) is underway. The country’s open, rolling terrain from East to West is very friendly to cavalry warfare, which makes good attack helicopters a necessity. Poland’s current fleet of 29 late Soviet-era Mi-24D/Vs has served them well, but they need more and better machines. Unsurprisingly, the planned Kruk (“Raven”) attack helicopter replacement competition was one of the TMP projects targeted for acceleration in the wake of recent events.
Contracts and Key Events FY 2015 – 2016
T-129 ATAK
(click to view full)
October 12/16: Airbus struck back at the Polish government yesterday following the dropping of a multi-billion Caracel helicopter deal. In an open letter to the Prime Minister, the Aerospace giant accused the government of shifting the goalposts as Airbus competed with US and Italian rivals, and attempting to contravene European Union regulations. Speaking in a separate email, Airbus Group Chief Executive Tom Enders said “never have we been treated by any government customer the way this government has treated us.” Industry sources estimate Airbus’ cost of running the helicopter sales campaign at several tens of millions of euros.
October 11/16: France has reacted angrily to Poland dropping a multi-billion helicopter deal with Airbus, warning that it would review defense cooperation with its NATO ally and cancelling a presidential visit to Warsaw. Winning support as a populist, right-wing, eurosceptics, the ruling Law & Justice party (PiS) said they would rather see the deal awarded to a company that could build the helicopters locally. Polish media reports that Warsaw has already begun negotiations with Lockheed Martin’s Sikorsky, manufacturer of locally-produced Black Hawk helicopters that could be purchased by the Polish army as soon as this year.
October 8/15: Poland has progressed its competition to replace the country’s fleet of Mil Mi-24 attack helicopters, with talks scheduled to soon begin with the four bidders. The ‘Kruk’ (‘Raven’) competition has attracted bids from Airbus with the EC665 Tiger; Bell Helicopters with the AH-1Z Cobra; Boeing with the AH-64 Apache and Turkish Aerospace Industries with the T129 ATAK. Despite the Polish Defence Ministry announcing in April that a winner is due for selection by the end of the year, these talks are scheduled to last one week per company, concluding by the end of November and a contract is now expected in the latter half of 2017.
April 22/15: In addition to the Patriot announcement, Poland has selected the Airbus H225M to fulfill its tri-service helicopter requirement. 50 of the Airbus helicopters will replace the current 40-strong fleet of Mil Mi-17s; a figure revised down from the original requirement for 70 units. The H225M beat out AgustaWestland’s AW149 and Sikorsky’s S-70i Black Hawk and S-70B Seahawk, with the winning helicopter set to undergo checks this May and June to verify its capabilities against Poland’s requirement set. The Eastern European state is also looking to upgrade its attack helicopter fleet. Combined with the Patriot program, the helicopter procurement will account for approximately a quarter of Poland’s eight-year defense modernization budget.
Aug 5/14: The Polish defence ministry has said that it is considering bids from 10 manufacturers under the Kruk competition. They wouldn’t name names, saying only that it involved “foreign and domestic companies offering both ready-made helicopters and components for assembly.”
The difference between ready-made and assembly kits is a bidder’s choice, and the kits option is often used to comply with local industrial offset rules. The harder question is how to get to 10 manufacturers, given the limited number of attack helicopter options out there.
Obvious leaders include Airbus (EC665 Tiger HAD), AW/TAI (T129 ATAK), Bell Helicopter (AH-1Z) and Boeing (AH-64E). South Africa’s Denel offers the Rooivalk, which hasn’t been exported but has competed elsewhere. Sikorsky is working very hard to win Poland’s utility helicopter competition with the S-70i, which is the focus of that company’s 2nd largest helicopter plant. Their Battlehawk add-on kit could offer Poland a single-type force that’s able to perform both utility and attack roles. That’s 6 possible competitors; beyond this list, one must either stretch the boundaries of the term “attack helicopter” to incorporate armed scouts, or entertain far less likely options. Russian Helicopters’ Ka-52 and Mi-28 are absolute non-starters, but there are rumors that Poland’s MRO and upgrade shop WZL-2 S.A. has bid, and that Israel’s IAI and RAFAEL also responded. Sources: Polskie Radio, “10 bidders to modernize Poland’s combat helicopter fleet”.
July 8/14: Kruk program launched, deadline to respond to the RFI is Aug 1/14. The program was originally supposed to launch a tender in 2018, with deliveries beginning in 2020, but the tender has now been moved up to 2015. Quantities may also be changing: the program’s original goal was 32 helicopters, but current reports indicate that Poland may increase that to 40.
In the mean time, Phase 1 involves setting technical and operational requirements, following market research. Hence the RFI. Next comes a more detailed feasibility study and staffing requirements based on the responses, followed by the formal RFP in 2015. Sources: Polish MON, “Rusza program smiglowcow uderzeniowych” | Emirates 24/7 News, “Poland launches tender for assault helicopters” | Flightglobal, “Poland launches attack helicopter acquisition” | IHS Jane’s Defence Weekly, “Poland starts ‘Kruk’ attack helicopter acquisition programme”.
Additional ReadingsThanks for tips to: Lukasz Pacholski.
Potential CompetitorsTörökország fontolóra veszi Oroszországnak egy nagy hatótávolságú légvédelmi rendszer kiépítésére vonatkozó ajánlatát - közölte kedden az NTV török hírtelevízió a török külügyminisztériumra hivatkozva.
In 2002 Romano Prodi, then-president of the European Commission, anticipated the EU to become a ‘real global player’, capturing an era when the European Union (EU) was determined to achieve ‘sustainable stability and security’ within the EU, and, ‘from Morocco to Russia and the Black Sea’.
So what happened to these aspirations?
Today, the EU lacks leadership, frustration grows within the Union, while increasingly failing to make a positive impact beyond. The result of Britain’s referendum was but one example of this wider crisis. Can this be simply attributed to lack of unity? The problem, as the Bratislava summit nears, is somewhat deeper and more alarming. Drunk on its self-perception, the EU has lost creativity of thought, which threatens the survival of the integration project.
Unfortunately, this is not merely a crisis affecting the EU’s policy-makers, but also the academic field and think tanks that provides the Brussels elites with tools to think about Europe. Perhaps, at the core of this problem is the fundamentally dangerous belief in the civilising mission of the European integration (spurred on by the German philosopher Jurgen Habermas and his intellectual heirs), whose thinking has proliferated in Brussels and beyond.
Habermas, as one of the most important thinkers in Europe, can be satisfied – the combination of his beliefs in emancipation (moving from exclusive state structures towards inclusive universal moral frameworks) and the importance of European integration as its instrument have been heard across the Continent. Few of his heirs would dispute that anything but an ‘ever closer union’ and ‘European values’ are simply but the only means to a brighter future, not only within the Union’s borders, but also beyond.
It is not that Habermas has been uncritical of the EU. After all, on more than one occasion the German philosopher highlighted the lack of institutional legitimacy and democratic participation of the European demos in the political process. However, the core problem here is not merely the problem of critiquing the current state of the European integration (though this too is fundamentally absent). Rather, there is a genuine lack of critique of the EU integration project as an end itself – its aims, intentions and, above all, the increasing inability and, indeed, heresy of diversity. The European Union, for its part, has turned into an instrument of obedience and control, victim of its own normative agenda. Where ‘Europe’ was once supposed to be a project of liberty, it is increasingly turning into a project of subversion.
Consequently, there is a lack of critique of the EU integration project as an end itself – its aims, intentions and, above all, the increasing heresy in diversity. The EU has turned into a victim of its own normative agenda. Where ‘Europe’ was once supposed to be a project of liberty, it has increasingly been turning into a dictatorship of thought, by those who spent decades arguing that the enlightened European project will solve issues that sovereign states no longer can. As a result, there is a little understanding of the internal and external consequences of thinking about the civilising mission of an ‘ever closer union’ as the only vision for the Continent’s future.
In this logic, alternatives have no place in Europe. The question of ‘Brexit’ provides an important case. It is not a question of believing in the UK’s exit from the Union, but rather that the argument for ‘Remain’ must be subject to scrutiny. Instead, as we have witnessed quite often over the past months, ‘Leave’ has been perceived as a ‘lunacy’ or ‘suicide’.
Perhaps, the path chosen by the British people may well turn out to suicidal. However, there is a need to critique the wider belief that simply more integration is the only rational remedy to on-going crises and challenges – more EU on the external borders, more EU in monetary affairs, more EU in defense policy. Alternatives are side-lined, perceived as either mad or heretical – after all, how could anyone possibly want to willingly live outside this great project without, like Norway, paying a high price for it?
It is not that the ‘Leave’ campaign have provided the right solutions (rather the opposite). Unfortunately, a Union set on simply promoting a singular vision of the future (however bright) merely breeds intolerance to alternative visions rather than ‘unity in diversity’, as the EU’s motto claims. After all, as one of the founding fathers, Robert Schuman made clear: ‘Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan’.
And what of the European integration project’s external dimension?
Potential new members of the Union must conform to EU conditions. This, of course, makes every sense if you wish to join any club, whether this involves a weekly game of squash or a monetary union; but clubs generally provide different membership options, dependent on members’ willingness than the club’s expectation.
But what of those who have little or no possibility (or wish) of joining the club? Must they also conform? According to the believers in the primacy of EUropean values, the answer is an obvious yes. As one EU official put it to me not so long ago with regards to the countries of the eastern neighbourhood – ‘they are our neighbours, and so must be close to our rules’. Our Rules, Our Neighbours. End of conversation.
The tragic case of the small Republic of Moldova provides a good example. Locked between the neighbourhood power struggles of the EU and Russia, Moldova’s internal politics is constantly determined by geopolitics. Yet, the country has been highlighted as the star pupil of the EU’s regional programme, and Moldova is the only eastern neighbourhood country to receive a visa-free regime as a ‘carrot’ for its efforts to follow EU norms.
Due to EU priority conditionality and financial support, Moldovan Border Police is, arguably, the most modern government institution in the country, while irregular migration reaching the EU through Moldova is in the 10s. No doubt, a remarkable success when compared to the dire situation in the Mediterranean, where ‘illegal’ migration is in the 100,000s.
This, however, is a sharp contrast to its socio-economic and political situation. Marred by emigration, corruption, oligarchy and political instability, Moldova highlights the dangers of limiting relations with its neighbours merely to conformity with European norms and values. Again, perceived as the only possibility for reform, the Union arrogantly disregards third countries’ interests and needs. Consequently, Moldova is left with a state of the art border management, and an oligarch-controlled political system that has witnessed 6 governments in 6 years, and €1bn euros stolen from its banks.
The heresy of diversity from an ‘ever closer union’ as an end, therefore, has major consequences. Within the Union, the democratic exercise exemplified in the UK referendum is snared at; externally, the EU pushes it own narrowly-defined reform agenda, as the only means of reaching the paradise.
However, as the Czech priest-reformer Jan Hus (burnt at stake for ‘heresy’ against the Catholic Church) stressed: Obedience is heresy. The EU, in its current state, in much the same way as the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages, requires not obedience, but resistance by questioning the end mission of a narrowly-defined project. It must be recognised that salvation does not merely exist in Brussels-centred catechism.
Resisting does not mean striking down the Brussels Leviathan. Rather, it requires the ability to imagine different visions of Europe, playing closer attention to the needs, interests and, indeed, different understanding of how Europe ought to be achieved – recognising that the challenge to its future existence does not lie in diverging voices, but in seeking conformity. Each club needs rules, but these rules are important only as long as they stimulate productivity or creativity. As soon as they seek to control, they become a hindrance and a threat to the system they seek to uphold.
As history has taught us, a singular vision of the future can have dangerous consequences. To this extent, however potentially costly, the British referendum should serve as a point of departure for a new vision of Europe where critical voices are not simply ignored. Let us, therefore, put behind crusading and search for obedience. The aim, as we move towards the Bratislava summit, must be to kill the necessity of an emancipatory (civilising) Europe, not only to revive our thinking about Europe, but to make Europe again a relevant interplay of productive and dynamic ideas.
Igor Merheim-Eyre is a doctoral researcher at the University of Kent and a visiting scholar at KU Leuven
This article was originally published by EurActiv on 15 September 2016.
The post ‘The European Union has lost its creativity: We need a new vision of Europe’ by Igor Merheim-Eyre appeared first on Ideas on Europe.
Clive Staples Lewis
EZEN A NAPON EMLÉKSZÜNK RÁJUK:
Corvin János, Korvin, hunyadi gróf és liptói herceg (Buda, 1473. április 2. – 1504. október 12.). Mátyás király és Edelpeck Borbála bécsi polgárleány fia. Mátyás király neki ajándékozta Munkácsot és a munkácsi birtokot. 1493. február 7-én Corvin János Munkácson kelt rendeletében megerősítette a város szabadságjogait. 1498. augusztus 18-án Naményban kelt oklevelében mint Szlavónia, Opavia és Liktovia hercege megengedte, hogy a sertések után járó tizenötödöt Munkács pénzben fizethesse. 1496-ban Corvin János feleségül vette Frangepán Bernát és Aragóniai Katalin lányát, Beatrixot. Feltehetően tőlük kerültek Galeotto Marzio Mátyás király jeles cselekedeteit megörökítő írása, több Mátyásról szóló mű és Janus Pannonius költeményei Perényi Gáborné Frangepán Katalinhoz a királyházi Nyalábvárba.
Gorka Sándor (Ungvár, 1878. október 12. – Budapest, 1945. április 10.). Biológus, zoológus, egyetemi tanár. A budapesti egyetemen szerzett diplomát. 1899-től az állattani tanszéken tanársegéd, 1907-től adjunktus, 1913-ban magántanár, 1914-20-ban az állattan helyettes tanára, 1921-től a pécsi egyetem orvosi karán a biológia helyettese, majd 1923-tól rendes tanára. 1914-24 között a Természettudományi Társaság első titkára, illetve főtitkára, a Természettudományi Közlöny szerkesztője.
Forrás: Keresztyén Balázs: Kárpátaljai Művelődéstörténeti Kislexikon (Hatodik Síp Alapítvány – Mandátum Kiadó, Budapest – Beregszász, 2001.)
MAGYARORSZÁG KULTÚRTÖRTÉNETÉBŐL:
Budapesten a Tömő (ma Kossuth Lajos) téren megkezdődött az Országház építése (1885).
Forrás: Magyarország kultúrtörténete napról napra, Honfoglalás Egyesület 2000.
NÉHA VÁLLALNOD KELL A KONFRONTÁLÓDÁST
„… menj el hozzá, intsd meg négyszemközt…” (Máté 18:15)
Jézus azt mondta: „Ha vétkezik atyádfia, menj el hozzá, intsd meg négyszemközt: ha hallgat rád, megnyerted atyádfiát” (Máté 18:15). A szembesítés vállalásához három dolog kell: tartás, bátorság és óvatosság. Nézzük meg ezeket egyenként: 1) Tartás. Mivel Jlzus biztos volt identitásában Isten Fiaként, nem kellett azon igyekeznie, hogy elnyerje a környezete tetszését és elfogadását. Ha szilárdan állsz abban, ki vagy Krisztusban, és mire teremtett mennyei Atyád, az szabaddá tesz arra, hogy vállald a konfrontációt, amikor szükséges, anélkül, hogy aggódnod kellene a népszerűség elvesztése vagy más negatív következmények miatt. 2) Bátorság. A farizeusoknak megvolt a hatalma ahhoz, hogy aláássák Krisztus jó hírnevét,és ez végül a keresztre feszítéshez vezetett. Ám ő ennek ellenére a szemükbe mondta az igazságot. Neked is ezt kell tenned. Késznek kell lenned arra, hogy felvedd keresztedet és kövesd őt, akkor is, ha ezzel vitát vagy sértődést váltasz ki. A konfrontálódás azt jelenti, hogy odaállsz valaki elé, a szemébe nézel, őszintén és szeretettel kezeled a problémát, mert értékesnek tartod a kettőtök kapcsolatát. 3) Óvatosság. Vigyázz, hogy Isten időzítését kövesd, ne a magadét! Könnyű hamis bátorsággal és virtuskodással provokálni másokat, hogy elérjük, amit akarunk. Könnyű arra hivatkozni, hogy a konfrontáció elengedhetetlen, amikor valójában csak az irányítást akarod átvenni. Kérd inkább Istent, mutassa meg, mikor, hogyan és hol konfrontálódj! A célod mindig az legyen, hogy a kapcsolat helyreálljon! Csakis így indulj el „meginteni atyádfiát”!
A fenti elmélkedés a Keresztyén Média UCB Hungary Alapítvány napi elmélkedése (honlap: maiige.hu), melynek írója Bob Gass. Magyar nyelven negyedévre szóló kiadvány formájában megrendelhető az említett honlapon, vagy a következő címen: Mai Ige, 6201 Kiskőrös, Pf. 33.