Diplomacy & Crisis News

Stephen Silver

North Korea,

According to Daily NK, which cited a source in Yanggang Province, North Korea has increased the number of Ministry of State Security (MSS) officials in the region, in order to cut down on smuggling and illegal border crossings.

North Korea, while it’s been denying for much of the last year that it has any coronavirus pandemic at all, has nevertheless strongly enforced its border with the country where the pandemic began, China. Back in January, North Korea reportedly shut the border with China for another 30 days, after two people were arrested for smuggling condiments, sugar, and soybean oil across the Chinese border.

At the start of February, North Korea reportedly closed the bridges to China in North Hamgyong Province, although it left one bridge, in Saebyul County, open for emergencies. Another such lockdown followed early in March.

Now, there’s a report that North Korea has clamped down even further on its border- and this time, it’s once again about smuggling.

According to Daily NK, which cited a source in Yanggang Province, North Korea has increased the number of Ministry of State Security (MSS) officials in the region, in order to cut down on smuggling and illegal border crossings. Those officials have reportedly ordered the neighborhood watch-like organizations known as the inminban to "provide them with information about recent trends regarding locals.”

The Kim Jong-un regime has stated repeatedly throughout the pandemic that North Korea does not have any cases of the pandemic. But that hasn’t stopped North Korea’s government from accepting vaccines, including from the COVAX Facility. The country has also closed schools and also imposed drastic social distancing measures.

UPI had reported in early March, citing South Korea’s Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, that North Korea had been preparing to resume low-level trade with China. That indicated that the regime might re-open borders for trade at some point between April and June.

"After North Korea's General Secretary Kim Jong Un put 'people first' during the Eighth Party Congress, it is expected imports of consumer goods including food, medicine and detergents could take place," KIEP said in its report.

In early March, PRI reported that North Korea would be reopening its borders in order to receive the COVAX Facility’s vaccines.

“AstraZeneca is probably the vaccine that they can handle most easily,” Jerome Kim of the International Vaccine Institute, told PRI in that report, in part because it only requires a single shot and does not need to be frozen before it’s administered. “It's a much more robust system from a public health perspective.”

Also in March, a U.N. expert stated that North Korea’s anti-coronavirus efforts have likely made matters worse for the population there.

“The further isolation of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea with the outside world during the COVID-19 pandemic appears to exacerbate entrenched human rights violations,” Tomas Ojea Quintana, U.N. special rapporteur on human rights in the country, said, per Reuters.

 Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.

Mark Episkopos

China Aircraft Carrier, Americas

Beijing plans to employ nuclear propulsion technology for the project.

China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) is making major strides toward its ambitious aircraft carrier procurement goals.

Two military insider sources told the South China Morning Post that China’s defense industry is ramping up its efforts to build a fourth aircraft carrier. “Shipbuilders and ship propulsion engineers are keen on making a significant breakthrough with the construction of the fourth carrier,” said one of the sources. “It will be a technological leap for the shipbuilding industry . . . but construction may take longer than for its sister ship due to the different propulsion systems,” the source noted.

A second source added that China’s Central Military Commission is reviewing a proposal from the China State Shipbuilding Corporation (CSSC) to employ nuclear propulsion technology for the project.

The CSSC said several years ago that a nuclear-powered aircraft would be a major milestone toward its goal to “realise its strategic transformation and combat-readiness capability in deep waters and open oceans by 2025.” In more concrete terms, nuclear-powered propulsion would better support certain high-energy weapon types like lasers and railguns and potentially leave more room for additional aircraft fuel or weapons. Nuclear propulsion offers other logistical benefits, making ships less dependent on fuel supply lines; this can potentially improve response times and enhance the carrier’s operational flexibility.

PLAN currently operates two aircraft carriers. Type 001 Liaoning was built from the hulk of the Soviet Kuznetsov-class aircraft cruiser Riga that China purchased from Ukraine in 1998. Liaoning was extensively refitted between 2011 and 2018, re-entering service in China’s Navy in the late 2010s. The conventionally powered Shandong is China’s first domestically-built aircraft carrier, commissioned in 2019 on the heels of at least nine sea trials. China’s third, yet-unnamed aircraft carrier is unlikely to be nuclear-powered. The vessel may, instead, feature an integrated electric propulsion (IEP) system that is more fuel-efficient and can offer better response times than the conventional steam turbine system of its Shandong counterpart. The inclusion of an IEP system will enable the use of electromagnetic (EM) launch catapults, one of the core design features outlined by PLAN for its next aircraft carrier.

The third aircraft carrier, unofficially referred to as the Type 003, is slated to be launched this year. Earlier reports suggested that the aircraft carrier will be launched by July 1 to commemorate the hundredth anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party, but it remains unclear if China’s defense sector can feasibly meet this ambitious timeline.  

PLAN seeks to operate as many as six carrier strike groups by 2035, with other sources adding that China aims to procure a total of ten aircraft carriers—a combination of nuclear and conventionally-powered vessels—by 2049. China’s rush to become an aircraft carrier superpower is a core component of its far-reaching naval modernization program, further reflected by its expanding roster of nuclear-powered submarines and specialized destroyers. A large, modern aircraft carrier fleet stands to greatly enhance China’s power projection capabilities in the East and South China Seas. This is where Beijing is locked in military competition with the United States and faces mounting challenges from India and various neighboring Pacific states.

Mark Episkopos is the new national security reporter for the National Interest. 

Image: Reuters

Desmond Lachman

U.S. Economy Bubble, Americas

America’s massive monetary and fiscal policy experiment is being conducted against the backdrop of a so-called everything asset and credit price bubble, which is very much larger and more pervasive than the earlier U.S. housing and credit market bubble. 

It has long been said that when America, still the world’s largest economy, catches a cold, the rest of the world economy catches pneumonia. With America now engaged in a budget and monetary policy stimulus experiment of epic proportions, the rest of the world is soon to find out what happens to the global economy when America succumbs to an inflationary fever.

Unfortunately, there is good reason to fear that the results will not be pretty. This would especially seem to be the case considering the fact that the American economic policy experiment is occurring at a time that we are in the midst of a global “everything” asset price and credit market bubble.

In the wake of the September 2008 Lehman bankruptcy, it was clear that troubles in the U.S. economy had serious ramifications for the rest of the global economy. Indeed, the bursting of a U.S. housing and credit bubble had ripple effects throughout world financial markets, which precipitated what economists now call the Great Economic Recession.

Fast forward to 2021. Now, America’s massive monetary and fiscal policy experiment is being conducted against the backdrop of a so-called everything asset and credit price bubble, which is very much larger and more pervasive than the earlier U.S. housing and credit market bubble. 

It is not simply that U.S. equity valuations are at the lofty levels last experienced on the eve of the 1929 stock market crash. Nor is it that the dubious Bitcoin market now has a valuation in excess of $1 trillion. Rather it is also that very risky borrowers, especially in the highly leveraged loan market and in the emerging-market economies, can raise money at interest rates not much higher than those at which the U.S. government can borrow.

Today’s everything bubble has been inflated by the extraordinarily low interest rates produced by the massive amount of central bank money printing in response to the coronavirus pandemic. This raises the question as to what happens when the pleasant easy money music stops and interest rates start to rise. Past experience would suggest that when that happens, bubbles will start bursting and the emerging market economies will run into serious trouble as money is repatriated to the United States.

A basic problem with the Biden $1.9 trillion budget stimulus package is that it risks creating precisely such a scenario of rising U.S. interest rates that will burst the global everything bubble. It does so by risking a serious overheating of the U.S. economy.

At a time that the U.S. economy is still receiving extraordinary monetary policy support and at a time that it is characterized by considerable household pent-up demand due to the earlier coronavirus lockdown, the Biden stimulus will imply that the U.S. economy will receive fiscal support that would amount to a staggering 13 percent of the size of the U.S. economy. Being more than three times the size of the 2009 Obama budget stimulus, it is difficult to see how the Biden stimulus will not lead to a booming U.S. economy later this year that, in turn, will lead to overheating.

While Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell keeps assuring us that the Biden budget stimulus does not risk higher inflation, the bond vigilantes evidently do not share his view. Since the start of the year, they have driven up the key ten-year U.S. Treasury bond rate from below 1 percent to over 1.6 percent. There is the real risk that if the Federal Reserve remains in inflation denial, the bond vigilantes could drive U.S. long-term interest rates ever higher on the expectation of yet higher inflation.

In late 2008, Queen Elizabeth II famously asked her advisors why no one had warned her about the bursting of the U.S. housing and credit market bubble. Following that recent experience, today’s policymakers have no excuse for not anticipating the real risk that a bursting of an even larger bubble could wreak havoc on the global economy. One can only hope that when the global everything bubble does burst, they do not get caught as flatfooted as economic policymakers in 2008 by the bursting of the U.S. housing market bubble.

Desmond Lachman is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He was formerly a deputy director in the International Monetary Fund’s Policy Development and Review Department and the chief emerging market economic strategist at Salomon Smith Barney. 

Image: Reuters

Stephen Silver

DARPA,

Jetpacks are a concept mostly associated with science fiction, and other fictional movies and TV shows set in the future or in a galaxy far, far away. But DARPA has some ideas about the future. 

Jetpacks are a concept mostly associated with science fiction, and other fictional movies and TV shows set in the future or in a galaxy far, far away. There are a couple of companies that build jetpacks for private usage, and last year, there were multiple reports of a man in a jetpack being spotted by airplanes in the Los Angeles area. The consensus seems to have been established that those jetpacks were actually drones, meant to look like a man in a jetpack.

Now, jetpacks are in the news for another reason- the possible use of them for military applications.

Task and Purpose reported this week that the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) recently asked for ideas for a “portable personal air mobility system,” one that could be used for (per the report) special operations, search and rescue, urban combat, maritime interdiction, and even logistics missions.

The official description asks for proposals for “submissions of innovative research concepts in the technical domain(s) of Air Platform, Ground/Sea Vehicles. In particular, DARPA is interested in understanding the feasibility of a portable personal air mobility system.” The request will remain open through April 20.

It won’t necessarily be only jetpacks, but other applications of such technology, such as “powered gliders, powered wingsuit, and powered parafoils,” Task and Purpose said. The report noted, however, that the U.S. military using Iron Man/Boba Fett-style jetpack setups is likely something that’s a long way off.

However, The Naval Institute said in a tweet last October that the British Royal Navy is also in the process of testing “Jet Suit assault teams,” which “could be used to rapidly swarm and board ships.” The same report said that the U.S. Special Forces Command was also “evaluating a jetpack that can reach speeds of more than 200 mph.”

There had been some reports about the U.S. military pursuing jetpack technologies going as far back as 2016. Back then, The Wall Street Journal reported that Jetpack Aviation, the Los Angeles-based jetpack company, was in talks with the special forces to develop a military jetpack and that the company had reached a “research and development agreement” with U.S. Special Operations Command, which futurism.com described as “a four-turbine jetpack that will lift twice the weight as current models, and require twice the fuel.”

Jetpack Aviation’s website currently features a pair of military products, including the Military Speeder and Cargo Speeder.

“The smallest, fastest and safest way to transport paramedics, medevac the injured, move life-saving suppliers, and insert/extract personnel. When time counts, the Speeder will save lives. It will also be possible to fly a de-rated version recreationally,” the company said. “The Speeder can either be piloted or flown fully autonomously. It can transform from a pilot carrying craft to cargo craft in less than 10 minutes by sliding off the pilot seat and sliding on the cargo pod or litter basket.”

Stephen Silver, a technology writer for The National Interest, is a journalist, essayist, and film critic, who is also a contributor to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Philly Voice, Philadelphia Weekly, the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Living Life Fearless, Backstage magazine, Broad Street Review and Splice Today. The co-founder of the Philadelphia Film Critics Circle, Stephen lives in suburban Philadelphia with his wife and two sons. Follow him on Twitter at @StephenSilver.

Jacob Heilbrunn

European Politics, Europe

Two state elections this past Sunday suggest that chancellor Angela Merkel’s final bequest to Germany may have been to prepare the path for the Green party to run it.

After sixteen years in power, Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union (CDU) may be facing its own Dunkirk. In two regional elections, Merkel’s party suffered two decisive defeats on Sunday in the run-up to federal elections in September that will decide the next chancellor of Germany. Not only Merkel will step down in September, but her party may also find itself ousted from power.

The state elections in Baden-Wuerttemberg and Rhineland-Palatinate suggest that a traffic-light—or red, green, yellow—coalition could emerge at the federal level between the Social Democrats, the Green party, and the Free Democrats. The CDU’s share of the vote declined by 3.6 in the former state and 4.6 percent in the latter. “It is possible to govern Germany without the CDU/CSU being in government. That message is now firmly in place,” said Social Democrat leader Olaf Scholz on Sunday. For the first time in German history, the Greens, who have eclipsed the Social Democrats, could occupy the chancellery. The Greens currently participate in coalition governments in eleven out of sixteen states. Both the Greens and the liberal Free Democrats scored well in the state elections. For the Free Democrats, who were left for dead after they failed to make the 5 percent hurdle in federal elections in 2013, the opportunity to once again play kingmaker, as they have for decades, would likely be irresistible. The last time the Free Democrats made common cause with the Social Democrats was with the doughty Helmut Schmidt, whom they abandoned in 1982 during the crisis over the Euro-missiles. The result was that the Free Democrats governed together with Helmut Kohl. In a coalition with the Greens and the Social Democrats, the classically liberal Free Democrats would be the most conservative party in the American sense, pushing for low tax rates and personal freedoms.

For the Christian Democrats, the Bundestag election in September could hardly look more daunting. A squabble is breaking out in the party over whether Armin Laschet, who was newly anointed the leader of the party, should also be its candidate for chancellor or if it should look elsewhere. The head of the sister party of the CDU, the Bavarian Christian Social Union, has its own possible candidate—Markus Soeder, the minister-president of Bavaria. Andreas Klurth contends that “Soeder, unlike Laschet, has a knack for being likable and jocular while also getting confrontational when the occasion calls for it. As a campaigner and politician he’s the tougher and wittier of the two.” The problem is that history is against Soeder. The last two candidates from Bavaria, Franz-Josef Strauss and Edmund Stoiber, both flopped at the national level. At a moment when Germany appears to be moving left, a candidate from Bavaria might compound rather than ease the difficulties that the Christian Democrats are currently experiencing.

Indeed, the twin state elections suggest that moving to the right would not serve as an elixir for the CDU’s ailments. The far-right Alternative for Germany also scored quite badly in both elections. In Baden-Wuerttemberg, the party’s share of the vote declined by 5 percent and 4.1 percent in Rhineland-Palatinate. The party has been wracked by infighting between its various political wings, not to mention the subsidence of the immigration issue. Instead, it is the coronavirus pandemic that has created fresh upheaval in German politics as the failure of the Christian Democrats to prevent, or even mitigate, a third wave has badly dented their popularity.

It increasingly looks as though Merkel, who remains personally popular in Germany, has timed her exit perfectly. The former East German scientist who rose to power as a protégé of Kohl before turning on him has all along displayed an uncanny ability to promote her own fortunes. But her own political party? Not so much.

Merkel not only jettisoned one conservative principle after another in her quest to remain in office, but also repeatedly destroyed any potential rivals. Now, as Merkel prepares to say auf Wiedersehen to the political scene, her once-proud party is descending into feuding, backbiting and intrigue. Merkel’s final bequest to Germany may have been to pave the path for the Green party to run it.

 Jacob Heilbrunn is editor of The National Interest.

Image: Reuters.

Ethen Kim Lieser

SR-71 Test,

It’s time to grab your favorite drink and have your jaw drop to the floor. This ultra-impressive video post, taken at Beale Air Force Base in 1986, shows the test of the SR-71 J58 engine at max afterburner power.

It’s time to grab your favorite drink and have your jaw drop to the floor.

This ultra-impressive video post, taken at Beale Air Force Base in 1986, shows the test of the SR-71 J58 engine at max afterburner power.

According to the U.S. Air Force, the “J58 engine was developed in the late 1950s by Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Division of United Aircraft Corp. to meet a U.S. Navy requirement. It was designed to operate at speeds of Mach 3+ and at altitudes of more than 80,000 feet. The J58 was the first engine designed to operate for extended periods using its afterburner, and it was the first engine to be flight-qualified at Mach 3 for the U.S. Air Force.”

It continued: “Two J58s powered the highly-sophisticated Lockheed SR-71 high-altitude strategic reconnaissance aircraft as well as its forerunners, the Lockheed A-12 and YF-12A prototype interceptor. In July 1976, J58 engines powered an SR-71 to a world altitude record of 85,069 feet and another SR-71 to a world speed record of 2,193 mph.”

Impressive indeed, but that failed to mention that the J58 generated a maximum thrust of 32,500 pounds—more than 160,000 shaft horsepower—and was the most powerful air-breathing aircraft engine devised at the time.

At maximum engine output, the fuel flow rate of the J58 climbs to roughly 8,000 gallons per hour and the exhaust-gas temperature is a blistering 3,400 degrees Fahrenheit.

At the mind-bending speeds, the SR-71 operates in, surface temperatures rise extremely high due to aerodynamic heating. Temperature readings often reached 800 degrees Fahrenheit at the nose, 1,200 degrees on the engine cowlings, and 620 degrees on the cockpit windshield.

Such extremes in speed and temperature forced designers of the aircraft to build upon the already cutting-edge technology of the time. Many features and systems simply had to be overhauled or just invented again. New oils, hydraulic fluids, sealants, and insulations were created to better deal with the ultra-hot temperatures.

According to Lockheed Martin Corporation, with the “anticipated temperatures on the aircraft’s leading edges exceeding 1,000 degrees Fahrenheit, dealing with the heat raised a host of seemingly insurmountable design and material challenges. Titanium alloy was the only option for the airframe—providing the strength of stainless steel, a relatively lightweight, and durability at the excessive temperatures.”

It continued: “Titanium, however, proved to be a particularly sensitive material from which to build an airplane. The brittle alloy shattered if mishandled, which meant great frustration on the … assembly line, and new training classes for Lockheed’s machinists. Conventional cadmium-plated steel tools, it was soon learned, embrittled the titanium on contact; so new tools were designed and fabricated—out of titanium.”

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn.

The COVID-19 pandemic is having a devastating impact on women and girls, and the fallout has shown how deeply gender inequality remains embedded in the world’s political, social and economic systems, UN chief António Guterres said in his address to the Commission on the Status of Women, on Monday. This year’s Commission will focus on charting a global roadmap towards achieving full equality in public life but, as Mr. Guterres recalled in his speech, gender equality in all walks of life is a long way off and has been further undermined by the pandemic.

Caleb Larson

Submarines, Eurasia

The Severodvinsk is incredibly advanced.

Here's What You Need to Know: During a conflict, losing track of a submarine is deadly.

In 2018, the Russian Navy’s most advanced submarine, the Severodvinsk, slipped into the Atlantic. For weeks the U.S. Navy couldn’t find it. Here’s why. 

Yasen-class

The Yasen-class is Russia’s most advanced nuclear-powered cruise missile submarine. The first of the class, the Severodvinsk, was commissioned into the Russian Navy in 2013 or 2014. 

One of the U.S. Navy’s top submarine officers was so impressed with the Severodvinsk that he had a model made for his office to remind him what the United States Navy is up against. 

Talking about naval threats from Russia, Rear Admiral Dave Johnson said “We’ll be facing tough potential opponents. One only has to look at the Severodvinsk, Russia’s version of a [nuclear-guided missile submarine] (SSGN). I am so impressed with this ship that I had Carderock build a model from unclassified data.” 

The Whole Shebang

The Severodvinsk is incredibly advanced and leverages some technologies that the Soviet Union researched in the 1980s. It has a large spherical sonar array in the bow that is thought to be very sensitive. 

Because of the sonar’s large size, the torpedo tubes were moved from the nose to a position amidships near the submarine’s sail and are aimed at a forward angle. The Severodvinsk’s torpedo tubes are a mix of standard 533 millimeter and 650-millimeter heavyweight torpedos. 

The Severodvinsk’s hull is made of non or low-magnetic steel, which either significantly reduces or eliminates the Severodvinsk’s magnetic signature. 

Soviet (and now Russian) submarines have favored a double hull design in the past in which a hydrodynamic outer hull encapsulates a stronger inner pressure hull. The Severodvinsk uses a hybrid design, the outer hull only partially covers the inner hull. 

There is a high degree of automation in the Severodvinsk, and the sub’s crew complement is consequently small—just sixty-five sailors and officers. 

In addition to missiles, the Severodvinsk has twenty-four tubes aft of the sail that can carry the P-800 Onyx anti-ship missiles or nuclear-capable Granat missiles.

The Severodvinsk will be armed with Zircon hypersonic anti-ship missiles, a first in submarine armament.

Silent as a Mouse

In an interview with 60 Minutes, a U.S. Navy Admiral said that Russia has a “very capable submarine force,” and that increased Russian submarine activity gives him pause.

Talking about the Severodvinsk specifically, the Admiral said that the Severodvinsk is “a brand new class of submarine, and it’s very capable, and it’s very quiet, so that’s the most important thing I think, in submarine warfare.”

Although he would not comment on reports that the U.S. Navy lost the Severodvinsk, Pentagon officials said that the Severodvinsk went into the Atlantic Ocean in 2018—and managed to evade detection for weeks.

During peacetime, losing a Russian submarine is a headache. During a conflict, losing track of a submarine is deadly.

Caleb Larson holds a Master of Public Policy degree from the Willy Brandt School of Public Policy. He lives in Berlin and writes on U.S. and Russian foreign and defense policy, German politics, and culture.

This article first appeared in April 2020.

Image: Wikimedia Commons

Peter Suciu

P-35,

The fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter has been noted for being a major leap forward in aviation design, and long before that aircraft took flight there was the Seversky P-35, an aircraft that was the forerunner of the Republic P-47.

The fifth-generation Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter has been noted for being a major leap forward in aviation design, and long before that aircraft took flight there was the Seversky P-35, an aircraft that was the forerunner of the Republic P-47.

Developed in the early 1930s, the aircraft was actually a contemporary of the U.K.'s Hawker Hurricane and Germany's Messerschmitt Bf 109 and was the first United States Army Air Corps (USAAC's) single-seat fighter to feature all-metal construction, retractable landing gear, and an enclosed cockpit. It might not have been stealth, but in the 1930s it was truly an innovative aircraft.

It was developed as part of a collaborative effort between Alexander P. de Seversky and Alexander Kartveli of The Seversky Aircraft Corporation, and it was derived from the Seversky SEV-3, which had set a record for piston-engine amphibious aircraft reaching 230 mph.

The P-35 was powered by a single Pratt & Whitney R-1830 engine that provided 850 horsepower and gave the aircraft a maximum speed of 280 mph and a cruising speed of 260 mph. It was armed with both a .50 caliber machine gun and a .30 caliber machine gun mounted in the fuselage, and it could carry up to 320 pounds of bombs.

The USAAC accepted seventy-six of the P-35s in 1937 and 1938 and assigned all but one of those aircraft to the 1st Pursuit Group, which was based at Selfridge Field, Michigan. When the P-35 was introduced in 1937 at a highly publicized event, it was presented as an aircraft that would provide the United States military with aerial superiority over any potential adversary. However, such boast greatly exaggerated the P-35's capabilities, and the aircraft's actual performance was considered poor by contemporary standards and it was essentially obsolete by the time the final aircraft were delivered – although USAAC aviators found the plane's ruggedness to be its greatest attribution.

Due to production delays, the USAAC opted to purchase 210 Curtiss P-36 Hawks. Matters were made worse by the fact that Seversky sold twenty of the two-seat fighter-bomber 2PA variant to the Imperial Japanese Navy in 1939 – and those became the only American-built aircraft used operationally by the Japanese during World War II.

As a result, the Seversky Aircraft Corporation ended up looking to export the remainder of the 196 P-35s that were built. Alexander P. de Seversky even headed to Europe to find a buyer for the aircraft but only Sweden placed an order. While originally one hundred and twenty were ordered, only sixty of the improved variant, designated the EP-106, were eventually delivered due to a June 1940  U.S. embargo of aircraft sales to Europe other than to Great Britain.

Instead many of the final batch of P-35s were sent to the Far East Air Force in the Philippines beginning in February 1941, and those aircraft didn't fare well against the Japanese fighters in the early stages of America's entry into World War II. All were lost in action, and as for Seversky he was fired from the company by the board of directors and the company was rebranded Republic Aviation – and it went on to create the truly revolutionary P-47 Thunderbolt.

A handful of P-35s eventually saw service with the Colombian Air Force and the Ecuadorian Air Force and most that were destroyed in combat during the war simply rusted away. Today there are three original surviving aircraft including one at the Swedish Air Force Museum; one at the Planes of Fame Air Museum at the Chino Airport, California; and one in the collection of the National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers, and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Peter Suciu

USS New Jersey,

As in visits from tourists: One of the most powerful battleships ever built for the U.S. Navy is getting a much-needed refurbishment – and it isn't to her weapons systems or sensors, but rather the decking.

One of the most powerful battleships ever built for the U.S. Navy is getting a much-needed refurbishment – and it isn't to her weapons systems or sensors, but rather the decking.

The Battleship New Jersey Memorial and Museum, which is located on the Camden waterfront on the Delaware River across from Philadelphia, will be getting some much-needed brotherly love in the form of a $500,000 Preserve New Jersey Historic Preservation Fund Grant, state officials announced.

The money will be used to address the issue of the deck of the USS New Jersey (BB-62), the Iowa-class battleship that has been a museum ship since the autumn of 2000. The ship, which is on several historic registers, was previously part of the U.S. Navy's mothball fleet, until the New Jersey State Review Board for Historic Sites recommended that it "be listed in the New Jersey Register of Historic Places, contingent upon the transfer of the battleship to New Jersey waters."

While the most decorated of the Iowa-class battleships, New Jersey won the most battle stars for combat actions, and was the only U.S. battleship to provide gunfire support during the Vietnam War. However, time and weather have been the biggest threat to the ship affectionately known as "Big J" or the "Black Dragon." All four of the Navy's World War II Iowa-class battleships were converted to museum ships with USS Missouri now in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii; USS Iowain Los Angeles, California; and USS Wisconsin in Norfolk, Virginia – USS New Jersey arguably must deal with the worst extremes that include the cold winters and hot summers along the Delaware River.

Visitors to the warship have had to deal with dings and holes in the rotted wood of the deck, which has been replaced in a piecemeal fashion since 2015 due to limited funds. Some sections had gotten so bad that it was considered a serious trip hazard. The decking was last replaced and upgraded before the Vietnam War. The original decking had been teak, but that is expensive so staff and carpenters have opted to find creative ways to cut down on its use while still retaining the historic integrity of the deck.

"This is a very exciting day for the Trust and Battleship New Jersey who are once again teaming up to preserve one of the most treasured and widely visited historic places in New Jersey," the state's Lt. Gov. Sheila Oliver, who also serves as Department of Community Affairs commissioner, told Patch.com earlier this month. "This grant round is going to breathe new life into the Battleship New Jersey's ongoing preservation work as well as to other heritage tourism sites throughout the state."

Battleship New Jersey has been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic and was closed to visitors since August. It recently resumed limited weekend tours and maintained social distancing.

The majority of the museum's income, or $1.5 million, come from grants including New Jersey's Department of Environmental Protection.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

 

Terry Campo

Politics, Americas

While Garland’s lack of clear answers at his committee hearing has understandably raised some eyebrows, it is still important that everyone look at the new attorney general with some perspective.

The Senate voted to confirm Merrick Garland as the United States’ eighty-sixth attorney general on Wednesday. He was formally sworn in as the chief law officer on Thursday.

Most of the news and opinion coverage surrounding President Joseph Biden’s initial nomination of Garland centered around whether he could restore the public’s faith in the Department of Justice. Understandably so. From accusations of the Trump administration’s DOJ unduly intervening in the criminal and antitrust cases of the president’s allies to one of the Obama administration’s attorney generals categorizing himself as a wing-man of the president, politicization of the Justice Department has seemingly grown too commonplace in recent years. Will Garland manage to convince the public that integrity, accountability, and law and order are still the driving forces behind the DOJ’s operations?

Without question, the respected federal judge and former prosecutor has the experience and qualifications needed to achieve this goal. He has built a strong reputation as a centrist with a commitment to fairness and equity. That is why he received the bipartisan support of the Senate Judiciary Committee and ultimately received a roll call vote on the Senate Floor a week early. That said, there is still reason to be concerned that Garland may continue prioritizing politics over the rule of law at the DOJ.

At his two-day confirmation hearing, Garland would not commit to ensuring any possible Biden administration links to “big tech” will not influence his DOJ’s decisionmaking.

A diverse coalition of Democratic and Republican legislators have noted that they are worried about Biden’s appointment of technology executives to key White House positions. Perhaps these concerns have merit; perhaps they do not. Regardless, given the current public sensitivity to politicization at the DOJ, it is not ideal that the aspiring head of this department could not provide a direct answer to the simple question of whether he would let potential White House conflicts of interest impact ongoing DOJ proceedings.

If justice is needed against today’s tech giants, then it appears it will come in due time regardless of the actions of a Garland DOJ. In Google v. Oracle, the Supreme Court is already examining allegations that Google stole competitors’ intellectual property to create Android—solidifying its mobile monopoly through anti-competitive means. Likewise, a majority of state attorneys general have already filed lawsuits accusing Google of engaging in monopolistic behavior, including forcing phone developers to pre-install Google’s apps as a condition for using Android. However, while state attorneys general and the Supreme Court may possess the capability of enforcing law and order, only the next attorney general can restore public faith in the Department of Justice as an institution. That process should start with Garland pledging to keep the DOJ independent of the executive branch.

During his confirmation hearing, Garland declined to commit to refrain from interfering in the Durham investigation—the probe being run by DOJ special counsel John Durham into possible illicit spying on the Trump campaign during the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Russian collusion investigation.

Former president Donald Trump’s attorney general, William Barr, indicated in his confirmation hearing that he would allow Robert Mueller, the special counsel who examined allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, to complete his investigation. He continually heaped praise on Mueller, going so far as to say he would not “be bullied into doing anything I think is wrong.” If only Garland was willing to make the same commitment with Durham at his confirmation hearing.

Should Garland interfere in the Durham investigation, then the Biden DOJ could quickly become perceived as being more politicized than that of the Obama and Trump administrations. That is not what the public wants or deserves. Lisa Monaco, Biden’s nominee for deputy attorney general, seems to understand as much. That is why, at her confirmation hearing, she committed to ensuring Durham has all the resources he needs to complete his probe. One can only hope that Garland ultimately comes to the same conclusion if he has not already.

While Garland’s lack of clear answers at his committee hearing has understandably raised some eyebrows, it is still important that everyone look at the new attorney general with some perspective. At the end of the day, he still boasts a strong track record as a centrist with bipartisan support and an impressive record of accomplishments. Time will tell if the pressure and expectations of his new job will impact his impartiality and future behavior, but the stability and credibility of the DOJ are depending on him staying the course.

Terry Campo served as counsel to the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee 

Image: Reuters

Peter Suciu

MiG-29K,

Since its introduction in the early 1980s, the Soviet Cold War-era Mikoyan MiG-29 has been widely exported and it has served in a variety of regions around the globe. Now the twin-engine combat aircraft, which was developed as an air superiority fighter in the 1970s, will be heading to the extreme conditions of the arctic for the first time.

Since its introduction in the early 1980s, the Soviet Cold War-era Mikoyan MiG-29 has been widely exported and it has served in a variety of regions around the globe. Now the twin-engine combat aircraft, which was developed as an air superiority fighter in the 1970s, will be heading to the extreme conditions of the arctic for the first time.

MiG-29K, Explained: 

The Russian military has been conducting combat training exercises of the upgrade MiG-29K (NATO reporting name: Fulcrum-D) from the Novaya Zemlya archipelago in the arctic. The goal of the operations has been to increase the zone of controlled airspace over Russia's northern sea routes, including those in the Barents Sea.

"The replacement of the flight personnel and MiG-31BM fighters of a separate composite aviation regiment took place at the Northern Fleet's Rogachyovo airfield," the press office of the Russian Navy's Northern Fleet said in a statement to Tass. "They were replaced for the first time by pilots of deck-based MiG-29K fighters of the 100th shipborne aviation regiment of the Northern Fleet's Air Force and Air Defense Army."

The press office added that the experimental combat duty will expand the area by employing the Northern Fleet's fighter aviation in the Arctic while it also increases the zone of controlled airspace over the Northern Sea Route.

The 100th shipborne aviation regiment is reportedly outfitted with generation four-plus MiG-29K fighters, the all-weather carrier-based variant of the original MiG-29. It was developed in the late 1980s from the MiG-29M, and it took its first flight in July 1988.

However, as the Russian Navy preferred the Su-27K – later re-designated Su-33 – Russia did not move forward with the MiG-29K program, and only two prototypes were originally built in the early 1990s. However, the Mikoyan Design Bureau did not stop its work on the MiG-29K aircraft despite the lack of financing since 1992.

The program later received a boost in the late 1990s to meet an Indian requirement for a ship-borne fighter following the purchase of a former Soviet aircraft carrier, which became INS Vikramaditya. The program was restarted and the MiG-29K was first received by the Indian Navy in 2009. As the Russian Navy's Su-33s began to near the end of their service, the MiG-29K was seen as a fitting replacement.

Going North

Now for the first time, MiG-29Ks are being deployed to the arctic region. The 100th shipborne aviation regiment's pilots had previously participated in the long-distance deployment of the Northern Fleet's carrier group in the Mediterranean Sea on the Russian heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser Admiral of the Fleet of the Soviet Union Kuznetsov.

The aircraft will join the Northern Fleet's 45th Air Force and Air Defense Army (anti-aircraft missile)regiment, which is armed with S-400 'Triumf' surface-to-air missile systems. The unit assumed combat duty on the Novaya Zemlya archipelago several years ago.

Peter Suciu is a Michigan-based writer who has contributed to more than four dozen magazines, newspapers and websites. He regularly writes about military small arms, and is the author of several books on military headgear including A Gallery of Military Headdress, which is available on Amazon.com.

Seth J. Frantzman

Israeli Military, Middle East

Israeli is a leader in drone technology and so knows how to counter these dangerous weapons.

Israel’s defense giant Israel Aerospace Industries and Edge, a UAE-based advanced technology group, signed a memorandum of understanding on March 11. It is the latest in growing ties between Israel and the United Arab Emirates in the wake of the September 2020 peace deal. Since then IAI has also attended IDEX, the large defense exhibition in the UAE in February 2021. The new emerging partnership could see more Israeli defense companies working with partners in the Gulf.

The new memorandum foresees cooperation in developing advanced counter-drone solutions, or what is called C-UAE, countering unmanned aerial systems. Drones pose a growing threat, according to U.S. military leaders at Central Command. The Gulf is particularly vulnerable as the Iranian attack using drones and cruise missiles on Saudi Arabia’s Abqaiq energy facility in 2019 illustrated. Drones can be used by terrorist groups, purchased off the shelf and modified, or they can be used by more advanced powers like Iran. Hybrid militant groups, like the Houthi rebels in Yemen, use Iranian technology in their kamikaze drones. 

Given the rising threat it is no surprise companies in the region are looking to improve their capabilities. The Israeli Iron Dome system and the U.S. Patriot system can confront drone threats. Other Israeli technology has been developed that combines electro-optics, jamming and radar, as well as new laser technology. These systems like Rafael’s Drone Dome and IAI’s Drone Guard are well placed to confront drone threats. Israel, a leader in making various types of drones, knows the challenge from both ends.

The new agreement is supposed to have wide ranging benefits for the region, the companies said in a statement. “Through leveraging IAI’s proven C-UAS solutions that are applied around the world to detect, identify, classify, and intercept a broad range of threats, EDGE, a young and disruptive company that has recently launched a series of Electronic Warfare solutions at a rapid pace, is leveraging its subsidiary, SIGN4L, a leading provider of electronic warfare services and solutions for national security, to collaborate with the Israeli defense manufacturer to build the tailored C-UAS Solution,” IAI noted.

Faisal Al Bannai, CEO and Managing Director, EDGE, said that in “line with the recent Abraham Accords and the UAE’s newly established cooperation and spirit of collaboration with Israel, EDGE and IAI are joining forces to deal with this growing threat.” At IAI there is also excitement. 

“IAI is proud to join forces with EDGE, to provide the UAE and the wider region with a unique and advanced solution in what is a key area of expertise for IAI. We believe that this collaboration will help both companies through the transfer of knowledge and sharing of capabilities. This MoU serves as a stepping-stone for further business and strategic alliances between our countries, and will enhance cooperation for research and development and technological innovation,” said Boaz Levy, the President and CEO of IAI. 

“Unmanned Aircraft Systems today are a preferred solution in building agility and resilience to the emerging challenges of asymmetric warfare. As EDGE invests extensively in autonomous capabilities, our co-development of a Counter-UAS in partnership with Israel Aerospace Industries will only help strengthen our advanced technology portfolio, and partnerships in the region and internationally,” said Bannai.

The new solution will be comprised of detection and identification using radar, optics and radio frequency. Then there will be a layer of “soft kill” solutions, such as using jamming, and then “hard kill” weapons to down the drone threat using guns, missiles or even lasers. These are the usual components of counter-drone solutions today. These are all necessary because drones can maneuver and fly slowly, and it is important to be able to locate them and classify them. For instance, drones can easily shut down an airport, which was clear from the Gatwick drone incident in 2018. Finding the drone and classifying it as a threat or something else, is essential. This needs to be done quickly as well. Many counter-UAS solutions have the ability to jam the drone’s frequency or even take it over and land it safely.

IAI is one of Israel’s largest defense companies and a world leader in aerospace. It has recently completed new loitering munition sales to several countries in Asia and is partnership with South Korea’a KAI on a loitering munition solution for helicopters. Inroads for IAI in the Gulf already began last year before the peace accord when it signed an agreement with Group 42 in the Gulf. The Edge agreement is important and symbolic. Edge is headquartered in Abu Dhabi

“It is dedicated to bringing innovative technologies and services to market with greater speed and efficiency,” the statement about the MOU noted. “EDGE offers expertise across five core clusters: Platforms and Systems; Missiles & Weapons; Cyber Defense; Electronic Warfare and Intelligence; and Mission Support.” 

Seth J. Frantzman is a Jerusalem-based journalist who holds a Ph.D. from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. He is the executive director of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis and a writing fellow at Middle East Forum. He is the author of After ISIS: America, Iran and the Struggle for the Middle East (Gefen Publishing) and Drone Wars: Pioneers, Killing Machines, Artificial Intelligence, and the Battle for the Future (Forthcoming, Bombardier Books). Follow him on Twitter at @sfrantzman.

Image: Reuters.

Caleb Larson

M24,

For several decades, the U.S. Army’s standard sniper rifle was the M24, essentially a slightly modified version of the Remington 700 rifle, known for its high accuracy. In addition to tight shot groupings even at greater rangers, the M24 sniper rifle is also incredibly robust, retaining accuracy well past when it was expected to.

For several decades, the U.S. Army’s standard sniper rifle was the M24, essentially a slightly modified version of the Remington 700 rifle, known for its high accuracy. In addition to tight shot groupings even at greater rangers, the M24 sniper rifle is also incredibly robust, retaining accuracy well past when it was expected to.

One Army Major who was involved with the rifle’s testing said the following about the rifle: “Interesting side note was there was a 10,000 round requirement for the barrel to maintain the original accuracy. In fact, after some 10,000 round tests, we discovered the accuracy improved. A few barrels were tested past 20,000 and accuracy never went below the original accuracy requirement.” The Army adopted the rifle in the late 1980s, and though it remains an excellent medium-distance rifle, it has since been outclassed by more modern rifle designs.

Beginning in the early 2010s, the Army began to move away from the M24 platform in favor of the M110, a suppressed semi-automatic platform. The Army has also issued the M2010 Enhanced Sniper Rifle (a bolt-action design) in some numbers to Army sniper teams. Lessons learned from the long-distance engagements that defined some of the fighting in Afghanistan necessitated a weapon system that could hit targets farther out than the 800 meter distances the M24 was capable of.

The M2010 is chambered in the .300 Winchester Magnum cartridge. Though the cartridge’s bullet is the same diameter as the 7.62x51mm NATO, the case is 16mm longer and can hold more propellent allowing for engagements at approximately 50 percent greater ranges than what had been possible with the M24.

Like the Army, the United States Marine Corps has fielded a variant of the Remington Model 700 Rifle, the M40. Though the Army’s M24 and the Marine Corps’ M40 are chambered in the same 7.62x51mm NATO cartridge, the Army’s M24 long action allows for the rifle to fire longer rifle cartridges with the same bullet diameter like the .300 Winchester Magnum, whereas the Marine’s M40’s short action cannot fire cartridges longer than the original NATO cartridge.

In any case, after over 50 years of service, the Marines are moving away from the M40 platform in favor of Barrett Firearms’ Multi-role Adaptive Design rifle. The MRAD is a highly adaptable platform that can quickly be reconfigured for a variety of cartridges, allowing for high shooter customization. It can in essence be tailor-made to whatever mission requirements would be and offers a considerably greater range than either the M24 or M40. You can read more about the powerful rifle here.

Despite the M24’s long and storied history, the rifle will likely be seen less and less in the U.S. military, as the rifle just can’t compete with the improvements in weight, range, and accuracy afforded by alternative precision rifle platforms. Still, over thirty years in Army service was a good run, and a testament to the M24 sniper rifle’s solid design.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Military and political officials in South Sudan supporting community-based militias in the Greater Jonglei region, must be held accountable for violence that killed more than 700 people over a six-month period last year, the UN human rights office, OHCHR, said on Monday. 

Charlie Gao

Submarines, Asia

Against Chinese submarines, Seoul's technology edge is not significant.

Here's What You Need to Know: The KSS-III is looking to be heavier and larger than the KSS-II and KSS-I.

While South Korea is not known for its submarine fleet, it possesses a decent sized, quietly capable fleet. The ultimate goal of the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN) is to produce their own diesel-electric attack submarine. The current fleet is relatively modern and possesses a strong overall capability for a diesel-electric fleet. But how does it stack up against the sub fleet of China and North Korea? Like many South Korean projects (eg. KDX-I, KDX-II, KDX-III for destroyers), the sub fleet is produced in a series of three. The KSS-I and KSS-II are German designs. The KSS-III will be the indigenous diesel-electric attack submarine. Some rumors have been floating around about a KSS-N nuclear submarine, but there is no concrete information on whether this proposal is being taken seriously. All submarines are relatively recent purchases, with the KSS-I being delivered in a series of two deals from 1993 to 2001, and the KSS-II being delivered from 2007 to the current day.

Consider the KSS-I, alternately referred to as the Chang Bogo-class, or Type 209/1200 in the German export designation is a simple diesel-electric attack submarine. The number “1200” in the German designation indicates the tonnage of the submarine. Armed with eight standard 533mm torpedo tubes, the primary weapon of the KSS-I is the German SUT torpedo, it is an export torpedo originally developed in the 1970s. The torpedo is electrically driven and wire-guided, with a max speed of 35 knots and a range of around 40km.

The ROKN operates the Mod 2 variant of the SUT, which allows the firing submarine to receive data from the seeker of the torpedo, potentially increasing accuracy and allowing it to act as a remote sensor for the submarine. The ROKN ordered two batches of 48 SUT Mod 2s along with their Type 209 submarines. The KSS-I was later modernized to utilize sub-launched Harpoon missiles as well as the indigenous Korean “White Shark” active-homing fire-and-forget torpedo. Nine KSS-1s are operated by the ROKN, with no plans to acquire more.  Further modernization of the type is being considered, including attaching additional sonar arrays and possibly converting them from diesel-electric to air-independent propulsion. The design continues to be produced for export, Korean companies acquired a license to build the submarine and are selling three of the type to Indonesia.

The KSS-II, or Son-Won-Il-class in ROKN service, or Type 214 continues the trend of the ROKN fielding German submarine designs. Unlike the KSS-I, the first ship of which was built in Germany, all KSS-IIs are built by Korean companies: Daewoo and Hyundai. The major advantage of the KSS-II is that it utilizes air-independent propulsion (AIP), allowing it to be more stealthy and stay underwater longer than earlier designs. It accomplishes this through the use of Siemens polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cells. The AIP system augments the existing diesel-electric powerplant, only running when the submarine is submerged. As installed on the KSS-II, the AIP system gives an underwater endurance of two weeks. Armament is generally similar to the KSS-I, with the submarine being able to use torpedoes and anti-ship submarine-launch missiles. The type also fields the ISUS 90 command and control system that amalgamates all sensor input and command and control functions. As standard per its class, the KSS-II is fitted with bow and flank sonar modules. The final KSS-II was completed in September 2017, being the ninth boat of its class.

After the completion of the KSS-II, South Korea wanted to craft its own design. The KSS-III is looking to be heavier and larger than the KSS-II and KSS-I.

It’s estimated that the KSS-III will weigh around 3000 tons, more than twice as heavy as the KSS-I. A lot of the weight probably comes from the expanded armament of the KSS-III: it’s designed with a vertical launch system that can fire the Korean Hyunmoon ballistic missile or a myriad of other missiles, possibly including the American Tomahawk. This would give the ROKN a significant sub strike capability, posing a threat against China or other larger navies they may be facing. Nine KSS-IIIs are planned to be procured in three batches of three, with increasing levels of indigenous technology in each batch. Notably, the number of VLS cells is expected to increase from six to ten in later batches of the KSS-III. No KSS-IIIs are complete, however, the keel for the first KSS-III was laid in 2016. Other KSS-IIIs are being produced at the same time, with steel being cut for the third KSS-III in July 2017.

The KSS-II and KSS-III designs compare favorably to any submarine the Korean People’s Navy can field. They possess advanced AIP propulsion designs allowing them to run quieter and longer and can fire more modern torpedos. They also have a superior sensor fit, having flank sonars, which have not been reported as being equipped on any North Korean submarines. Against Chinese submarines, the technology edge is not as significant. In general, the armament fit of the KSS-series appears to be superior, with the SUT Mod 2 having a longer range and targeting flexibility compared to the Yu-4 and Yu-6 which arm China’s Type 039 attack submarines. However, the latest Chinese submarines, the Type 039A class, appear to incorporate advanced sonar signature reduction techniques which may impede the ability for the Korean submarines to detect them.

Charlie Gao studied Political and Computer Science at Grinnell College and is a frequent commentator on defense and national security issues.

This article first appeared in June 2018.

Image: 

Caleb Larson

B-52 Bomber,

The United States’ venerable B-52 bomber fleet could be getting a new hypersonic missile currently in development by the Air Force — the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile — to allow them to stay relevant in a future fight.

The United States’ venerable B-52 bomber fleet could be getting a new hypersonic missile currently in development by the Air Force — the Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile — to allow them to stay relevant in a future fight.

In comments given to the Air Force Association’s winter meeting, Global Strike Command Head Gen. Timothy Ray said that “Certainly, we’re in the in the conversation for the HACM as that gets developed,” Breaking Defense reported. “I’m not in a place where I can give you the dates and times. But as the Air Force looks at … how we continue to go down that path, I believe the HACM will give us an additional set of capabilities that will be both fitted for bombers and for fighter aircraft. So I think it’s a pretty special capability to keep our eye on.”

The Air Force previously reported on the HACM, explaining that it would ultimately be a hypersonic air-breathing cruise missile. In contrast to other hypersonic boost-glide missiles which rely on solid-fuel rockets to reach sub-orbital space, the HACM’s advanced scramjet air-breathing engine technology would make it dependent on atmospheric oxygen for combustion and therefore propulsion, give it a shorter, lower altitude flight profile.

In tandem with the HACM, the Air Force also has a more conventional rocket-powered hypersonic vehicle, the Air-launched Rapid Response Weapon, or ARRW. The Air Force intends the ARRW to be launched from the B-52 as well as the B-1B Lancer bombers, both of which will carry the missile externally on hardpoints. Will Roper, the former Assistant Secretary of the Air Force also suggested that the new missile could be carried by Air Force F-15s as well.

In addition to the new weaponry, the B-52 will also be getting new engines. Though the Air Force has not yet selected a firm to replace their aged B-52 engines, the hope is that newer, more efficient engines will reduce fuel consumption and improve performance, allowing the B-52 to fly well into the 2050s — fully a century after its first flight.

Despite the efforts to keep the B-52 in the sky for several more decades, the Air Force’s newest bomber is also well underway. The highly stealthy B-21 Raider bomber’s maiden flight should be sometime later this year or early next year, somewhat delayed due to the ongoing pandemic.

The Air Force is currently phasing out their B-1B Lancer bombers, and regardless of when exactly the B-21 is ready for service, the Air Force will ultimately maintain a mixed fleet of brand-new, highly stealthy bombers, and enormous Cold War-era hypersonic-toting bombers. Irregardless of the B-52’s age — it won’t go away anytime soon.

Caleb Larson is a Defense Writer based in Europe. He holds a Master of Public Policy and covers U.S. and Russian security, European defense issues, and German politics and culture.

Ethen Kim Lieser

Gas Prices,

In recent weeks, oil prices have surged to more than $65 a barrel. And gas prices in step already have risen about 35 cents a gallon on average over the past month, according to the AAA motor club—and could reach the much-feared $4 a gallon territory in some states by this summer.

The rise in gasoline prices across the United States has been ramping up in recent weeks, but it appears that industry executives are still reluctant to pump more oil out of the ground.

This is indeed bad news for travelers who want to hit the road on the cheap this spring and summer.

In recent weeks, oil prices have surged to more than $65 a barrel. And gas prices in step already have risen about 35 cents a gallon on average over the past month, according to the AAA motor club—and could reach the much-feared $4 a gallon territory in some states by this summer.

These quickly swelling prices, however, have been anticipated for weeks.

Last month, when the artic freeze was pummeling much of the United States, the fuel price tracking website GasBuddy projected that the national average for gas prices could surge as much as 10 to 20 cents per gallon from the average price of $2.54 per gallon.

It contended that such an increase in prices at the pump could lead the national average to rise to $2.65 to $2.75 per gallon—the highest prices seen since 2019 and the highest seasonal prices in more than five years. More than forty states are already seeing gas prices higher than last year, with half seeing double-digit increases.

“The quicker the affected refineries are able to come back online, the better, and perhaps less painful for motorists than if they remain out of service for even longer,” Patrick De Haan, head of petroleum analysis at GasBuddy, said in a statement, adding that the national average could surge to $3 per gallon closer to Memorial Day weekend as refineries eventually begin to switch over to EPA-mandated cleaner summer fuels.

“Oil prices have continued to rally as global oil demand recovers from the worst of the COVID-19 pandemic, and now the extreme cold weather shutting refineries down, us motorists just can’t seem to catch a break. We probably won’t see much, if any relief, anytime soon.”

Some areas will witness a more negative impact. “Expect gas prices to rise more closer to the markets these refineries serve, primarily Texas, Louisiana, Alabama, Mississippi, Florida, Georgia, the Carolinas, and potentially even up the coast, as the Colonial pipeline carries refined products from the affected refineries as far as New Jersey,” De Haan added.

The prediction was indeed correct. Since Monday, the national average for a gallon of regular gasoline has climbed by five cents to $2.82. Rising crude prices, tightening gas supplies, and increased gas demand continue to drive pump prices to higher ground.

According to the latest compiled data from the Energy Information Administration, total domestic gas stocks decreased by 11.9 million bbl to 231.6 million bbl, as demand increased from 8.15 million b/d to 8.73 million b/d last week.

Ethen Kim Lieser is a Minneapolis-based Science and Tech Editor who has held posts at Google, The Korea Herald, Lincoln Journal Star, AsianWeek, and Arirang TV. Follow or contact him on LinkedIn.

The pain and deprivation of individual Syrians and the widespread destruction, a decade of conflict has wrought on Syria, has been documented in a series of images taken by 16 photographers working in the country.

Mark Episkopos

North Korea, Asia

Too big and will fail for sure: The DPRK’s army consists of 1.2-1.3 million active personnel with around 6 million more reservists.

Here's What You Need to Know: This is one really old and bloated military force.

North Korea’s defense budget occupies a staggering 23% of its GDP, by far the highest proportion of any 21st-century country. The DPRK’s massive military outlays have gone, in no small part, towards sustaining the fourth-largest standing army in the world. There is little question that North Korea’s prodigious ground forces are, and will be, the backbone of its capacity to wage conventional war on the Korean Peninsula. In the years following the Korean War, the North’s Korea People’s Army (KPA) was markedly smaller, but better-equipped and exponentially more modernized than its southern counterpart. These roles have all but flipped in the decades of North Korean military stagnation and economic neglect that accompanied the collapse of its Soviet benefactor.

A closer look at North Korea’s current ground forces paints the picture of a bloated army, crippled by technical backwardness and severe logistical deficits.

Despite the regime’s insulated nature, the combined efforts of South Korean and U.S. intelligence have generated reliable and fairly consistent data concerning the KPA’s makeup. The DPRK’s army consists of 1.2-1.3 million active personnel with around 6 million more reservists, 6,000 tanks, up to 15,000 artillery pieces, 6,500 - 10,000 armored vehicles, just under 300 military helicopters, and 2,100 rocket launchers.

At first glance, these numbers would seem to put the KPA in the running for one of the world’s strongest armies; in most categories, the DPRK boasts roughly twice the units of South Korea’s armed forces. But the KPA’s sheer numbers belie an altogether different reality: the bulk of KPA equipment is grossly outdated, with a great swathe being borderline inoperable.

For instance, the KPA’s tank force is largely made up of Soviet T-54/55, T-62, and domestic T-62 variants that are more befitting of a military museum than a contemporary battlefield. It remains unclear how many of these antique models, some of which are over seven decades old, are in active service. Even assuming that many or even most of them are in an operable state, the KPA’s tanks are of dubious battlefield value when compared with the much newer and significantly more powerful K-1 and K-2 series tanks fielded by the ROK’s armed forces.

The same dynamic is evident in the KPA’s artillery roster. North Korea’s M-30 and D-20 are mid-20th century Soviet howitzers being held back by their low range and cripplingly poor accuracy. The 170-millimeter Koksan, the KPA’s largest artillery piece, suffers from an abnormally high dud rate and is unlikely to inflict meaningful damage on critical South Korean infrastructure or military equipment before being neutralized by ROK counter-battery fires.

Elsewhere, as with armored combat vehicles and attack helicopters, the ROK occupies both qualitative and quantitative superiority. The KPA’s deficit in the latter is surprisingly stark, with the ROK army boasting downwards of 700 helicopters in active military service.

Not even the KPA’s numerical personnel superiority is without significant caveats. There are credible, well-sourced reports that large swathes of the KPA are plagued by basic equipment shortages, crippling malnourishment and, more recently, a lethal Covid-19 outbreak.

The KPA’s decrepit state follows a similarly grim pattern to that of North Korea’s moribund air force and obsolete parts of its navy. By widespread expert consensus, the DPRK stands to lose decisively in a contemporary conventional war with the ROK.

Pyongyang’s massive conventional defense outlays continue to yield negligible military value. They have succeeded only in propping up a bloated and increasingly unviable military-industrial complex that cannot be meaningfully reformed without a comprehensive decommission and modernization effort.

Mark Episkopos is a frequent contributor to The National Interest and serves as a research assistant at the Center for the National Interest. Mark is also a PhD student in History at American University.

This article first appeared in September 2020.

Image: Reuters