Johann Hari's article in The Independent, "Renouncing Islamism: To the brink and back again," is the result of his interviews with some unusual people - British Muslims who first joined violent global jihad, then very publicly abandoned and began to battle against Islamism.
Some interesting passages. This one, about the impellers that led them into violent jihad as an identity:
In March 2008, DID's "Sharpen Yourself: LinkedIn & Social Networking Sites" discussed both the career benefits and the security risks associated with social networking sites. Sir John Sawers, the prospective head of Britain's MI6 intelligence agency is probably wishing he had read it. His wife recently leaked dangerously specific information about him on Facebook, and created a controversy about his fitness for the job. Sir John now faces a possible parliamentary probe.
Despite these setbacks, social networking is becoming a larger part of the military, and the industry. In July 2009, Lockheed Martin released its internal company social networking application's underlying code as open source software. Social networking efforts are being explicitly built into PR contracts, and it's becoming one of the information shifts that are changing the battlespace. The Pentagon recently launched an official blogging platform at DODLive.mil, and US Forces Afghanistan launched a social networking strategy that extends to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Followed by orders to bases to stop blocking key social networking sites.
These efforts can make a big contribution toward ensuring that the Pentagon is no longer, as Secretary of Defense Robert Gates puts it, "being out-communicated by a guy in a cave." On the other hand, they are not risk-free.
This post is inspired by fiona patten's comment (link):
"Yep we [the Australian Sex Party] are not going to be all things to all people- but hopefully we can make some positive change."
Prince Charles, who will in time be King of Australia as he will be of the United Kingdom, wants to take the opposite tack. He wanted to be Defender of Faiths when he becomes King, rather than Defender of the Faith, that is, a particular faith (originally the Roman Catholic faith). That proved controversial, particularly with the Church that he would be the formal head of, but no longer the defender of. So, he's had a new idea (link).
In a compromise he has now opted for Defender of Faith which he hopes will unite the different strands of society, and their beliefs, at his Coronation.
However, there would be huge obstacles to overcome before the Prince can fulfil his wish which he has discussed with some of his closest advisers. It would require Parliament to agree to amend the 1953 Royal Titles Act which came into law after changes were made for the Queen's Coronation in the same year. A senior source told The Daily Telegraph: "There have been lots of discussions. He would like to be known as the Defender of Faith which is a subtle but hugely symbolic shift."
Three teams have now received Phase 1 contracts to begin developing develop a radical new aircraft, under a US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) program known as "Vulture."
DARPA's goals for Vulture are not trivial: 5 years on station with a 450kg/ 1,000lb payload, 5kW of onboard power, and sufficient loiter speed to stay on station for 99% of the time against winds encountered at 60,000-90,000 feet. The system could act as a satellite substitute for communications relay or reconnaissance, as long as the payload fit within the weight limit. Vulture would be more vulnerable to anti-aircraft missiles than a satellite, and could be targeted by fighter jets as well given the right launch profile; on the other hand, that closeness would improve sensor resolution and communications capability.
The engineering challenges ahead are formidable, as one would expect for a DARPA project. The power system in particular must be extremely reliable, and the aircraft's materials will require advances of their own. Odysseus will be exposed to far more warming and cooling than satellites, and more ultraviolet radiation which will affect the aircraft's materials. The design is also likely to require very large wings, both to help keep it aloft and to accommodate the number of solar cells required. Conditions at altitude can challenge the durability of those wings, especially with hydrogen storage tanks attached. Aerovironment's Helios (1998-2003) demonstrated this the hard way in its 2003 crash.
So, who is competing, and what are the proposed designs?
Not long ago, the Drudge Report broke the story that Prince Harry had been deployed to and was serving in Afghanistan. The verb broke seems particularly apt to this sort of reporting. As of a few minutes ago, the AP is reporting that Prince Harry’s deployment is at an end.
I’m not a fan of British Royalty. I’m an American and the whole notion of a monarchy is slightly offensive to me. Far too often, the British Royalty provides just another sad celebrity family drama for the tabloids. They are in my opinion more often an embarrassment to Britain than they are a source of national pride and honor, and I believe the history of England is with few exceptions is marked by overcoming the limitations of the monarchy rather than enjoying particularly great leadership. It wasn’t British monarchs that made England master of the seas and the envy of the world. It wasn’t British monarchs that made England a beacon of liberty.
But all that is rather beside the point.
In December 2005, Defense Industry Daily's "UK Warns USA Over ITAR Arms Restrictions" and "ITAR Fallout: Britain to Pull Out of F-35 JSF Program?" seemed to herald a very difficult period in Anglo-American defense relations. Despite the promises of 2 successive American Presidents, the ITAR exemptions that Britain had sought remained blocked in America's legislature - and European initiatives to resume defense exports to China were not improving the situation. Meanwhile, MPs in Britain were becoming very insistent on a fix. DID's articles were cross-posted to Winds, explaining the nature of America's ITAR arms export restrictions, the issues at play, and the stakes.
In time, many of these issues were worked out. In August 2006, the US and UK reached a technology transfer agreement concerning the F-35 fighter - an agreement that would serve as a model for other F-35 industrial partners. By December 2007, Tier 1 partner Britain had signed the F-35's Production, Sustainment & Follow On Development MoU.
A broader fix was still on the agenda, however, and in July 2007 it materialized as a a treaty that would change the way the American and British defense firms cooperate on defense programs. The treaty is progressing toward ratification in Britain, but some key details remain to be worked out. Those details are likely to matter a great deal to the American side in particular. Defense Industry Daily's Spotlight article aims to act as a one-stop briefing that explains the treaty's motivation, key terms, and outstanding issues; keeps track of ongoing developments; and links to the key documents...
I think Armed Liberal has a new hero.
Lord Paul Drayson was an accomplished man when he entered Tony Blair's government. The founder of the needle-free vaccination firm PowderJect reaped over GBP 80 million, rose to a seat in the House of Lords, and went from an under secretary position to a full Ministry. He then went on to accomplish a great deal over 30 months as Britain's Minister of State for Defence Equipment and Support. Britain has become the world's leading practitioner of availability-based support contracts for a wide range of weapons systems, major mergers of government departments have been undertaken to move that approach forward, and NAO audits have confirmed the effectiveness of the new approach. A Defense Industrial Strategy has been put in place that outlines key technical skills Britain believes it must retain, and industry consolidation and changes have followed in its wake as the industrial base moves to adjust. The country is now on track to buy full-size aircraft carriers for the first time in decades, and other shifts have begun, albeit slowly, in the land sector.
How do you top that? How about by submitting the most unusual, way-out, and flat-out interesting senior government official resignation letter I've ever seen. Or am likely to see in my lifetime.
Read the rest at Defense Industry Daily...
Back in 2005, DID reported that talks were underway for a Saudi purchase of Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft from Britain's BAE Systems - with an important (albeit denied) set of conditions on the Saudi side. The Eurofighter Typhoon is an advanced 4+ generation fighter built to excel at air-air combat; subsequent versions that have just come into service are beginning to get some precision strike capability as well. Its excellent integration of controls and software lets pilots focus on flying the situation, rather than flying the plane, and it is superior to all existing and planned US aircraft except the F-22A Raptor in the air-air combat role. There are reports that Russia's advanced SU-30MKI/M sold to India and Malaysia may be superior - but at the very least, one can say with confidence that the Eurofighter Typhoon is one of the top 3 air superiority fighters in the world. To date, it has been ordered by its partner nations (Britain, Germany, Italy, Spain) and by Austria, but it has lost out in a number of export competitions for various reasons.
December 2005 saw confirmation that Saudi Arabia had ordered Eurofighter Typhoons, but the 72-plane deal started sinking into the tar sands shortly thereafter. Investigations from Britain's Serious Fraud Office swirled around a GBP 43 billion oil-for-planes deal from the 1980s called Al-Yamamah (see Appendix A); in return, the Saudis played some hardball of their own. The investigation was eventually called off at the highest levels of government, and after a period of uncertainty, a contract was finally signed on Sept 11/07. Ironies aside, the price was a bit lower than many expected; even so, it comes with support arrangements that are likely to push the final value quite a bit higher, while facing much less scrutiny.
DID's Spotlight article covers the Saudi Eurofighter deal, its associated controversies, and related developments...
Believe it or not, stuff that matters happens outside of the USA sometimes.
"It's the biggest fighter aircraft deal since the early 1990s," said Boeing's Mark Kronenberg, who runs the company's Asia/Pacific business. DID has offered ongoing coverage of India's planned multi-billion dollar jet fighter buy, from its early days as a contest between Dassault, Saab, and MiG for a 126 plane order to the entry of American competitors and even EADS' Eurofighter. What began as a lightweight fighter competition to replace India's shrinking MiG-21 interceptor fleet appears to have bifurcated into two categories now, and two expense tiers.
That trend got a sharp boost in March 2006, when Press Trust of India (PTI) reported a surprise pullout by the CEO of Dassault on the eve of the RFP. The Mirage 2000v5 will no longer be fielded for the India deal, despite the fact that India already flies 40 Mirage 2000Ds and its senior officials have touted standardization as a plus factor. So, what's going on?
In a word, lots. The participants changed, India's view of its own needs is changing, and the nature of the order may be changing as well - but with the release of the official $10 billion RFP, the competition can begin at last. DID offers an in-depth look at the MMRCA competition's changes, the RFP, and the competitors...
Yeah, it's all about Israel. Really, it is....
"Birmingham, England - Counterterrorism police arrested nine men in an alleged kidnapping plot Wednesday - a plan that reportedly involved torturing and beheading a British Muslim soldier and broadcasting the killing on the Internet... Police would not confirm the potential victim's occupation or details of the plot that was unraveled in the predominantly Pakistani neighborhood in central England. A dozen houses and two Islamic bookshops were cordoned off and being searched."
Such nice people. Maybe if we treated them better and offed the Jews as a show of good faith, they'd be kind to us....
Meanwhile the soldier, a fine bloke by all accounts, is in police custody as well - for his own protection.
Military equipment is often used in ways its manufacturers never imagined, let alone intended. A fine illustration of this principle in action came to us from the Garmsir area in Helmland Province, southern Afghanstan, earlier this month. The UK MoD release, which includes links to video of the overall operation, described the incident this way [I've added appropriate links]:
"The UKTF met ferocious Taliban fire from all sides. As planned, Z Company then withdrew back to the far side of the Helmand river having successfully completed their objective. The engagement lasted for approximately five hours.... Having fought for a period, the Marines regrouped. When they discovered Lance Corporal Ford was missing.... An initial plan was hatched to use Viking vehicles but they eventually concluded that the Apache WAH-64 attack helicopters would provide a quicker and safer means to get him out and back to safety. And so four troops were strapped to the small side 'wings' of two Apaches, two to each helicopter. A third Apache provided aerial cover, and further units laid down a mass of covering fire while the other two Apaches landed. All four men got off, as well as some of the aircrew, to provide additional firepower and to assist with the recovery of Lance Corporal Ford...."
Read the full article for the rest of the story. Since then, the UK Ministry of Defence has released photos and video from the operation that includes the WAH-64s with Royal Marines on board.
Tony Blair discusses the new environment and explains how and why he sees it changing Britain's military needs: "Our Nation's Future - Defence." Wish we had that sort of thoughtful communication over here - from any of our so-called "leaders."
Folks may agree with Tony, or disagree. This much is clear: In a time of war, his level of ability to address the public head-on, and call on key facts amidst the unpredictable parry-and-thrust of discussion as opposed to a mere tightly-scripted debate, is what we need to demand in and of our leaders. This is going to be a tall order for Americans in particular, who are unprepared for these demands at a structural educational and cultural level. Even so, in a world at war where the information battlefield matters and the media is increasingly globalized, this isn't an option any more.
