nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

Ukraine can’t maintain advanced US-supplied weapons – Pentagon

 https://www.rt.com/news/592888-pentagon-audit-weapons-ukraine/ 23 Feb 24

The US reportedly rushed vehicles to Kiev without factoring in necessary repairs

The US has no plan in place to maintain, service or repair tanks, armored vehicles and air defense systems Washington has given to the Ukrainian military, Pentagon Inspector-General Robert P. Storch has admitted. The failure to plan “puts at risk Ukraine’s ability to fight effectively using the US-provided equipment, as well as the DoD’s readiness to address other national security threats if needed,” he added.

Storch revealed in two redacted reports released to the public on Tuesday that the US has delivered 186 Bradley and 189 Stryker Infantry Fighting Vehicles (IFV), 31 Abrams main battle tanks, and an unspecified number of Patriot air defense systems to Ukraine. 

Washington’s  Department of Defense “had not developed or implemented a plan” to maintain any of them, according to the inspectors cited in the reports, who warned that there is nothing to suggest the weaponry could be sustained past October 2024.

All of the weapons systems were taken from the US military’s own stocks “without limits,” under the Presidential Drawdown Authority, according to the reports. If this practice continued, it “may require the [Department of Defense] to choose between the readiness of [Ukrainian] units or the readiness of US Army units,” one official told the inspectors.

The US military-industrial complex has struggled to replace the weapons systems sent to Ukraine, due to shortage of parts and the lack of production lines or trained personnel. Maintenance was described in the reports as an “afterthought” for the Pentagon, whose main focus was to arm Ukraine “as quickly as possible.” 

An official with the US European Command told the inspectors that “the current model would not be sustainable or effective over the longer term.” 

“The DoD provided Ukraine with armored vehicles and air defense systems without a plan to ensure their long-term usefulness,” Storch said in a statement. “While the DoD is currently working on developing such a plan, the lack of foresight in this matter is concerning.”

The US military sent “limited spare parts, ammunition, and maintenance support” and “did not coordinate or tailor those efforts into a comprehensive sustainment plan,” according to Storch’s reports.

What was sent included “some” consumables and spare parts for field maintenance, as well as “additional items informed by US experience operating the weapon systems in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria,” Storch noted. 

While the sustainment is not required under the current congressional authority for sending weapons to Ukraine, “the weapon systems are not likely to remain mission capable” without it, the report said.

At least one US Patriot system has been destroyed by hypersonic missiles, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. Last year’s Ukrainian offensive saw multiple Bradley and Stryker vehicles destroyed in attempts to advance against Russian defenses. There have been no public reports of Abrams tanks being used in active combat operations so far.

February 25, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Arms maker BAE Systems makes record profit amid Ukraine and Israel-Gaza wars

the company was “very happy with our London listing”

Jasper Jolly and agencies 22 Feb 24

FTSE 100 company says global instability is making government focus on defence spending.

Increased military spending prompted by Russia’s war on Ukraine and the Israel-Gaza conflict helped the British weapons manufacturer BAE Systems to record profits last year, with further growth expected in the year ahead.

The FTSE 100 company made underlying profits before interest and tax of £2.7bn on record sales of £25.3bn in 2023.

Shares in weapons manufacturers have surged in the past two years after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 made governments reassess their plans for military spending.

There have also been increased tensions across the Middle East since 7 October, when Hamas, which runs Gaza, killed 1,139 people in an assault on Israel. Israel has responded with months of bombardment of Gaza, killing nearly 30,000 Palestinians.

BAE Systems’ sprawling interests include building nuclear submarines and fighter jets, tanks and ships, as well as guns and ammunition.

Charles Woodburn, the BAE chief executive, said the weapons manufacturer was expecting “sustained growth in the coming years”.

………………………………….. BAE said it expected sales to rise by between 10% and 12% during 2024. Its long-term order book was also boosted last year by the Aukus pact between Australia, the UK and the US to build the next generation of nuclear-powered attack submarines, and the global combat air programme between Italy, Japan and the UK to develop a new fighter jet.

BAE said that the war in Ukraine in particular had highlighted the importance of autonomous technology, while “reinforcing the critical need for munitions and maintaining legacy capabilities”.

Woodburn also said the company was “very happy with our London listing”. Several of the biggest companies listed on London’s stock market have moved to the US because of concerns that UK companies are relatively undervalued. BAE Systems is unlikely to follow their lead because of the deep influence – including a “golden share” – that the UK government holds to prevent it falling into foreign ownership.

Woodburn said: “If you go back a few years, I think we were trading at a discount to some of our US peers, but I think through the strong performance of the business over recent years, I think we’ve, in many ways, closed much of that gap.”

February 25, 2024 Posted by | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Ukraine: how nuclear weapons continue to increase the risks, two years on

nuclear weapons industry has profited shamelessly off the world’s concerns over nuclear war. Since the conflict in Ukraine and the increased nuclear tensions that followed, profits for the companies that produce nuclear weapons drove up, with an $15.7 billion increase in share and bond holding and $57.1 billion increase in loans and underwriting. 

 https://www.icanw.org/ukraine_two_years_how_nuclear_weapons_increase_the_risks— 24 Feb 24

Two years after the start of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the risk of nuclear weapons use continues to escalate, while the looming threat of their use protracts this conflict with a high civilian cost. Nuclear-armed states and their allies waver between condemning nuclear threats and engaging in irresponsible practices such as nuclear sharing and championing their own nuclear deterrent. But the rest of the world is pushing back, condemning these behaviors and demanding the total elimination of these weapons of mass destruction through the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).

Melissa Parke, Executive Director of ICAN, said: “This terrible war with its use of nuclear blackmail and overt threats to use nuclear weapons is a wake up call that the world needs to heed – as long as the nuclear-armed states hang on to their arsenals and cling to the misguided doctrine of deterrence, we face the likelihood these weapons will be used sooner or later. Nuclear weapons should be abolished before it is too late.”

The escalating nuclear risk

Following Vladimir Putin’s initial explicit threats to use nuclear weapons, we have seen nuclear-armed states and their allies continue to erode the decades-long nuclear taboo over the past two years. The escalation in nuclear rhetoric has not just been seen in Russia (Medvedev made explicit threats just this last weekend) but also in Israel and North Korea, and in recent calls by Polish and German politicians and NATO leaders for a European nuclear weapon. Nuclear threats heighten tensions in an already dangerous environment, reduce the threshold for use of nuclear weapons, and greatly increase the risk of nuclear conflict and global catastrophe. 

The risk is also increased by the irresponsible practice of nuclear sharing, or stationing nuclear weapons, which seems to be on the rise. In June 2023, Vladimir Putin said Russia delivered its first tactical weapons to Belarus, though it is unclear how many nuclear weapons were transferred. This is a reckless and dangerous escalation that was widely condemned. But for NATO states, and particularly the five states that host US nuclear weapons, simply condemning Russia’s nuclear sharing without taking any action is insufficient and hypocritical. Particularly as the US and the UK also seemingly explore the return of US nuclear weapons to Lakenheath. Any nuclear sharing complicates decision making and increases the risk of miscalculation, miscommunication and potentially catastrophic accidents. It is time to end this practice that threatens peace and security and puts us all at risk.

Deterrence theory and nuclear weapons profiteers at the heart of the problem

The use of nuclear blackmail by Russia in the context of the Ukraine war has demonstrated the flawed nature of nuclear deterrence which, instead of ensuring stability, gave Russia the cover to commense its brutal and devastating invasion. Yet Russia’s nuclear threats have failed to deter the US and European countries from supplying Ukraine with weapons and money to fight Russia.

With current conflicts directly involving two nuclear-armed states, it is clear that nuclear deterrence doesn’t keep the peace. NATO states are playing into Putin’s hands by insisting nuclear weapons are a necessary deterrent. It only strengthens Putin’s position to promote his own “deterrent” now, whereas rejecting deterrence and reinforcing the nuclear taboo would limit his options. 

Meanwhile, the conflict has also accelerated the global nuclear arms race, with the nine nuclear-armed states increasing spending to $82.9 billion in 2022. As a result, the nuclear weapons industry has profited shamelessly off the world’s concerns over nuclear war. Since the conflict in Ukraine and the increased nuclear tensions that followed, profits for the companies that produce nuclear weapons drove up, with an $15.7 billion increase in share and bond holding and $57.1 billion increase in loans and underwriting. 

The global response to nuclear risk: the TPNW

The way to respond to the heightened risk of nuclear war is not to increase nuclear arsenals or threaten nuclear retaliation. The answer is for all countries to condemn nuclear threats, end their reliance on nuclear deterrence and join the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). The TPNW specifically outlaws the threat to use nuclear weapons, as well as the irresponsible practice of nuclear sharing.

All nuclear-armed states need to take urgent steps to de-escalate tensions and to break free from the dangerous doctrine of nuclear deterrence, and nuclear disarmament must be an essential element of a negotiated peace between Russia and Ukraine. Multilateral nuclear disarmament is the only guarantee to prevent other nuclear-armed countries from following Russia’s lead and using their nuclear weapons as a shield to commit war crimes and terrorize civilian populations. Joining the TPNW is a crucial step to delegitimize nuclear deterrence and eliminate nuclear weapons. 

Over the past two years, the states parties of the TPNW have been central in pushing back against any and all nuclear threats and challenging the false narrative of nuclear deterrence.  At the First Meeting of States Parties in 2021, they condemned unequivocally “any and all nuclear threats, whether they be explicit or implicit and irrespective of the circumstances.” At the second meeting in New York,they agreed “to challenge the security paradigm based on nuclear deterrence by highlighting and promoting new scientific evidence about the humanitarian consequences and risks of nuclear weapons and juxtaposing this with the risks and assumptions that are inherent innnuclear deterrence.”  It is time for all responsible states to join the TPNW. 

February 24, 2024 Posted by | business and costs, Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK to consider suspending arms exports to Israel if Rafah offensive goes ahead

As situation in Gaza worsens, diplomatic pressure is mounting on UK to follow other countries and suspend arms sales to Israel

Patrick Wintour, 23 Feb 24, Guardian,

The UK government will consider suspending arms export licences to Israel if Benjamin Netanyahu goes ahead with a potentially devastating ground offensive on the Palestinian city of Rafah in southern Gaza.

As the humanitarian situation in Gaza has worsened, diplomatic pressure has been mounting on the UK to follow other countries and suspend arms exports to Israel.

Ministerial sources said that while no decision had been made about a suspension of arms export licences, the UK had the ability to respond quickly if the legal advice to ministers said that Israel was in breach of international humanitarian law.

The UK has joined other allies in pressuring Israel to avoid a ground offensive in Rafah. In a letter to the foreign affairs select committee about arms export controls to Israel published on Tuesday, David Cameron, the foreign secretary, said he could not see how an offensive in Rafah could go ahead without harming civilians and destroying homes.

In the Commons, the UK foreign minister Andrew Mitchell underscored that an offensive in Rafah represented a red line for the UK government, telling MPs on Wednesday that the UK was urging the Israeli government not to launch an attack that could have “devastating consequences”……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Earlier this month The Hague district court ordered the Dutch government to stop the export of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel within seven days due to the risk of serious violations of international humanitarian law and referred to the ATT and EU policy.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/21/uk-to-consider-suspending-arms-exports-to-israel-if-rafah-offensive-goes-ahead

February 24, 2024 Posted by | Israel, UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Swarming Our World. What Happens When Killer Robots Start Communicating with Each Other?

“Emergent” AI Behavior and Human Destiny

What Happens When Killer Robots Start Communicating with Each Other?

 Tom Dispatch, Michael Klare, FEBRUARY 20, 2024

Make no mistake, artificial Intelligence (AI) has already gone into battle in a big-time way. The Israeli military is using it in Gaza on a scale previously unknown in wartime. They’ve reportedly been employing an AI target-selection platform called (all too unnervingly) “the Gospel” to choose many of their bombing sites. According to a December report in the Guardian, the Gospel “has significantly accelerated a lethal production line of targets that officials have compared to a ‘factory.’” The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) claim that it “produces precise attacks on infrastructure associated with Hamas while inflicting great damage to the enemy and minimal harm to noncombatants.” Significantly enough, using that system, the IDF attacked 15,000 targets in Gaza in just the first 35 days of the war. And given the staggering damage done and the devastating death toll there, the Gospel could, according to the Guardian, be thought of as an AI-driven “mass assassination factory.”

Meanwhile, of course, in the Ukraine War, both the Russians and the Ukrainians have been hustling to develop, produce, and unleash AI-driven drones with deadly capabilities. Only recently, in fact, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky created a new branch of his country’s armed services specifically focused on drone warfare and is planning to produce more than one million drones this year.  According to the Independent, “Ukrainian forces are expected to create special staff positions for drone operations, special units, and build effective training. There will also be a scaling-up of production for drone operations, and inclusion of the best ideas and top specialists in the unmanned aerial vehicles domain, [Ukrainian] officials have said.”

And all of this is just the beginning when it comes to war, AI-style, which is going to include the creation of “killer robots” of every imaginable sort. But as the U.S., Russia, China, and other countries rush to introduce AI-driven battlefields, let TomDispatch regular Michael Klare, who has long been focused on what it means for the globe’s major powers to militarize AI, take you into a future in which (god save us all!) robots could be running (yes, actually running!) the show. Tom

By combining AI with advanced robotics, the U.S. military and those of other advanced powers are already hard at work creating an array of self-guided “autonomous” weapons systems — combat drones that can employ lethal force independently of any human officers meant to command them. Called “killer robots” by critics, such devices include a variety of uncrewed or “unmanned” planes, tanks, ships, and submarines capable of autonomous operation. The U.S. Air Force, for example, is developing its “collaborative combat aircraft,” an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) intended to join piloted aircraft on high-risk missions. The Army is similarly testing a variety of autonomous unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), while the Navy is experimenting with both unmanned surface vessels (USVs) and unmanned undersea vessels (UUVs, or drone submarines). China, Russia, Australia, and Israel are also working on such weaponry for the battlefields of the future.


TOMGRAM

Michael Klare, Swarming Our World

POSTED ON FEBRUARY 20, 2024

Make no mistake, artificial Intelligence (AI) has already gone into battle in a big-time way. The Israeli military is using it in Gaza on a scale previously unknown in wartime. They’ve reportedly been employing an AI target-selection platform called (all too unnervingly) “the Gospel” to choose many of their bombing sites. According to a December report in the Guardian, the Gospel “has significantly accelerated a lethal production line of targets that officials have compared to a ‘factory.’” The Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) claim that it “produces precise attacks on infrastructure associated with Hamas while inflicting great damage to the enemy and minimal harm to noncombatants.” Significantly enough, using that system, the IDF attacked 15,000 targets in Gaza in just the first 35 days of the war. And given the staggering damage done and the devastating death toll there, the Gospel could, according to the Guardian, be thought of as an AI-driven “mass assassination factory.”

Meanwhile, of course, in the Ukraine War, both the Russians and the Ukrainians have been hustling to develop, produce, and unleash AI-driven drones with deadly capabilities. Only recently, in fact, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky created a new branch of his country’s armed services specifically focused on drone warfare and is planning to produce more than one million drones this year.  According to the Independent, “Ukrainian forces are expected to create special staff positions for drone operations, special units, and build effective training. There will also be a scaling-up of production for drone operations, and inclusion of the best ideas and top specialists in the unmanned aerial vehicles domain, [Ukrainian] officials have said.”

And all of this is just the beginning when it comes to war, AI-style, which is going to include the creation of “killer robots” of every imaginable sort. But as the U.S., Russia, China, and other countries rush to introduce AI-driven battlefields, let TomDispatch regular Michael Klare, who has long been focused on what it means for the globe’s major powers to militarize AI, take you into a future in which (god save us all!) robots could be running (yes, actually running!) the show. Tom

“Emergent” AI Behavior and Human Destiny

What Happens When Killer Robots Start Communicating with Each Other?

BY MICHAEL KLARE

Yes, it’s already time to be worried — very worried. As the wars in Ukraine and Gaza have shown, the earliest drone equivalents of “killer robots” have made it onto the battlefield and proved to be devastating weapons. But at least they remain largely under human control. Imagine, for a moment, a world of war in which those aerial drones (or their ground and sea equivalents) controlled us, rather than vice-versa. Then we would be on a destructively different planet in a fashion that might seem almost unimaginable today. Sadly, though, it’s anything but unimaginable, given the work on artificial intelligence (AI) and robot weaponry that the major powers have already begun. Now, let me take you into that arcane world and try to envision what the future of warfare might mean for the rest of us.

By combining AI with advanced robotics, the U.S. military and those of other advanced powers are already hard at work creating an array of self-guided “autonomous” weapons systems — combat drones that can employ lethal force independently of any human officers meant to command them. Called “killer robots” by critics, such devices include a variety of uncrewed or “unmanned” planes, tanks, ships, and submarines capable of autonomous operation. The U.S. Air Force, for example, is developing its “collaborative combat aircraft,” an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) intended to join piloted aircraft on high-risk missions. The Army is similarly testing a variety of autonomous unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs), while the Navy is experimenting with both unmanned surface vessels (USVs) and unmanned undersea vessels (UUVs, or drone submarines). China, Russia, Australia, and Israel are also working on such weaponry for the battlefields of the future.

The imminent appearance of those killing machines has generated concern and controversy globally, with some countries already seeking a total ban on them and others, including the U.S., planning to authorize their use only under human-supervised conditions. In Geneva, a group of states has even sought to prohibit the deployment and use of fully autonomous weapons, citing a 1980 U.N. treaty, the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons, that aims to curb or outlaw non-nuclear munitions believed to be especially harmful to civilians. Meanwhile, in New York, the U.N. General Assembly held its first discussion of autonomous weapons last October and is planning a full-scale review of the topic this coming fall.

For the most part, debate over the battlefield use of such devices hinges on whether they will be empowered to take human lives without human oversight. Many religious and civil society organizations argue that such systems will be unable to distinguish between combatants and civilians on the battlefield and so should be banned in order to protect noncombatants from death or injury, as is required by international humanitarian law. American officials, on the other hand, contend that such weaponry can be designed to operate perfectly well within legal constraints.

However, neither side in this debate has addressed the most potentially unnerving aspect of using them in battle: the likelihood that, sooner or later, they’ll be able to communicate with each other without human intervention and, being “intelligent,” will be able to come up with their own unscripted tactics for defeating an enemy — or something else entirely. Such computer-driven groupthink, labeled “emergent behavior” by computer scientists, opens up a host of dangers not yet being considered by officials in Geneva, Washington, or at the U.N.

For the time being, most of the autonomous weaponry being developed by the American military will be unmanned (or, as they sometimes say, “uninhabited”) versions of existing combat platforms and will be designed to operate in conjunction with their crewed counterparts. While they might also have some capacity to communicate with each other, they’ll be part of a “networked” combat team whose mission will be dictated and overseen by human commanders.  The Collaborative Combat Aircraft, for instance, is expected to serve as a “loyal wingman” for the manned F-35 stealth fighter, while conducting high-risk missions in contested airspace. The Army and Navy have largely followed a similar trajectory in their approach to the development of autonomous weaponry.

The Appeal of Robot “Swarms”

However, some American strategists have championed an alternative approach to the use of autonomous weapons on future battlefields in which they would serve not as junior colleagues in human-led teams but as coequal members of self-directed robot swarms. Such formations would consist of scores or even hundreds of AI-enabled UAVs, USVs, or UGVs — all able to communicate with one another, share data on changing battlefield conditions, and collectively alter their combat tactics as the group-mind deems necessary.

“Emerging robotic technologies will allow tomorrow’s forces to fight as a swarm, with greater mass, coordination, intelligence and speed than today’s networked forces,” predicted Paul Scharre, an early enthusiast of the concept, in a 2014 report for the Center for a New American Security (CNAS). “Networked, cooperative autonomous systems,” he wrote then, “will be capable of true swarming — cooperative behavior among distributed elements that gives rise to a coherent, intelligent whole.”

As Scharre made clear in his prophetic report, any full realization of the swarm concept would require the development of advanced algorithms that would enable autonomous combat systems to communicate with each other and “vote” on preferred modes of attack. This, he noted, would involve creating software capable of mimicking ants, bees, wolves, and other creatures that exhibit “swarm” behavior in nature. As Scharre put it, “Just like wolves in a pack present their enemy with an ever-shifting blur of threats from all directions, uninhabited vehicles that can coordinate maneuver and attack could be significantly more effective than uncoordinated systems operating en masse.”

In 2014, however, the technology needed to make such machine behavior possible was still in its infancy. To address that critical deficiency, the Department of Defense proceeded to fund research in the AI and robotics field, even as it also acquired such technology from private firms like Google and Microsoft. A key figure in that drive was Robert Work, a former colleague of Paul Scharre’s at CNAS and an early enthusiast of swarm warfare. Work served from 2014 to 2017 as deputy secretary of defense, a position that enabled him to steer ever-increasing sums of money to the development of high-tech weaponry, especially unmanned and autonomous systems.

From Mosaic to Replicator

Much of this effort was delegated to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), the Pentagon’s in-house high-tech research organization. As part of a drive to develop AI for such collaborative swarm operations, DARPA initiated its “Mosaic” program, a series of projects intended to perfect the algorithms and other technologies needed to coordinate the activities of manned and unmanned combat systems in future high-intensity combat with Russia and/or China…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

To obtain both the hardware and software needed to implement such an ambitious program, the Department of Defense is now seeking proposals from traditional defense contractors like Boeing and Raytheon as well as AI startups like Anduril and Shield AI. While large-scale devices like the Air Force’s Collaborative Combat Aircraft and the Navy’s Orca Extra-Large UUV may be included in this drive, the emphasis is on the rapid production of smaller, less complex systems like AeroVironment’s Switchblade attack drone, now used by Ukrainian troops to take out Russian tanks and armored vehicles behind enemy lines.

At the same time, the Pentagon is already calling on tech startups to develop the necessary software to facilitate communication and coordination among such disparate robotic units and their associated manned platforms. To facilitate this, the Air Force asked Congress for $50 million in its fiscal year 2024 budget to underwrite what it ominously enough calls Project VENOM, or “Viper Experimentation and Next-generation Operations Model.” Under VENOM, the Air Force will convert existing fighter aircraft into AI-governed UAVs and use them to test advanced autonomous software in multi-drone operations. The Army and Navy are testing similar systems.

When Swarms Choose Their Own Path

In other words, it’s only a matter of time before the U.S. military (and presumably China’s, Russia’s, and perhaps those of a few other powers) will be able to deploy swarms of autonomous weapons systems equipped with algorithms that allow them to communicate with each other and jointly choose novel, unpredictable combat maneuvers while in motion. Any participating robotic member of such swarms would be given a mission objective (“seek out and destroy all enemy radars and anti-aircraft missile batteries located within these [specified] geographical coordinates”) but not be given precise instructions on how to do so. That would allow them to select their own battle tactics in consultation with one another. If the limited test data we have is anything to go by, this could mean employing highly unconventional tactics never conceived for (and impossible to replicate by) human pilots and commanders.

……………………………………  In military terms, this means that a swarm of autonomous weapons might jointly elect to adopt combat tactics none of the individual devices were programmed to perform — possibly achieving astounding results on the battlefield, but also conceivably engaging in escalatory acts unintended and unforeseen by their human commanders, including the destruction of critical civilian infrastructure or communications facilities used for nuclear as well as conventional operations………………………………………………..

What then? Might they choose to keep fighting beyond their preprogrammed limits, provoking unintended escalation — even, conceivably, of a nuclear kind? Or would they choose to stop their attacks on enemy forces and instead interfere with the operations of friendly ones, perhaps firing on and devastating them

……………………………….. Many prominent security and technology officials are, however, all too aware of the potential risks of this “emergent behavior” in future robotic weaponry and continue to issue warnings against the rapid utilization of AI in warfare.

Of particular note is the final report that the National Security Commission on Artificial Intelligence issued in February 2021. Co-chaired by Robert Work (back at CNAS after his stint at the Pentagon) and Eric Schmidt, former CEO of Google, the commission recommended the rapid utilization of AI by the U.S. military to ensure victory in any future conflict with China and/or Russia. However, it also voiced concern about the potential dangers of robot-saturated battlefields……………………………………………………………..

When the leading advocates of autonomous weaponry tell us to be concerned about the unintended dangers posed by their use in battle, the rest of us should be worried indeed. Even if we lack the mathematical skills to understand emergent behavior in AI, it should be obvious that humanity could face a significant risk to its existence, should killing machines acquire the ability to think on their own…………… more https://tomdispatch.com/emergent-ai-behavior-and-human-destiny/—

February 23, 2024 Posted by | technology, weapons and war | 1 Comment

Israel Demolishing Buildings to Construct Road in Gaza to Cut the Strip Into Two

The construction demonstrates Israel’s long-term plan to occupy Gaza.

By Dave DeCamp / Antiwar.com,  https://scheerpost.com/2024/02/21/israel-demolishing-buildings-to-construct-road-in-gaza-to-cut-the-strip-into-two/

Israel is demolishing buildings to build a road through central Gaza that will cut the Strip in two, demonstrating Israel’s long-term plans to occupy the territory.

Israel’s Channel 14 reported on the road, which is being built in an area known as the Netzarim Corridor. The new road, known as Highway 749, will separate Gaza City from the rest of the Strip.

Israel is creating a 1-kilometer “buffer zone” to the north and south of the road, similar to the zone it’s creating along the entire Israel-Gaza border. According to The New Arab, among the structures likely to be demolished to build the road is the Turkish-Palestinian Friendship Hospital, which was shut down in November due to an Israeli siege that cut off fuel.

The construction will also require the demolition of Al-Aqsa University, several villages, amusement parks, and agricultural land. Israeli soldiers said the purpose of the road was to make it easier to launch incursions into Gaza, and it could also prevent the movement of Palestinians from the south to the north.

The Wall Street Journal also reported on the highway and said it would effectively create a militarized belt across Gaza that will help prevent the 1 million Palestinians who fled the north from returning to their homes. Israeli officials told the Journal that the road will be patrolled until Israel’s military operations are complete, which they say could be years away.

The Israeli officials also claimed that they don’t seek to occupy the Gaza Strip but plan to maintain “security control” within its borders for an indefinite period, which amounts to a military occupation. Israeli government ministers have also not been shy about their desire to re-establish Jewish settlements in Gaza.

February 23, 2024 Posted by | Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

As Israeli Forces Fire on Starving Palestinians, US Again Vetoes UN Cease-Fire Resolution

“We should ask ourselves: How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before the council deems it necessary to call for a cease-fire?” said the Algerian envoy to the United Nations.

Common Dreams JULIA CONLEY, Feb 20, 2024

As a United Nations agency halted aid deliveries in northern Gaza, where acute malnourishment is rampant among children, citing a “breakdown of social order” fueled by Israel’s bombardment of and blockade on the enclave, the United States for a third time on Tuesday vetoed a cease-fire resolution at the U.N. Security Council—saying it was an inopportune time to demand that Israel end its massacre of Palestinians.

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield said the cease-fire resolution, proposed by Algeria, would “negatively impact” negotiations for a truce that are ongoing.

Amar Bendjama, Algeria’s ambassador to the U.N., said the U.S. ambassador’s lone vote against the resolution “implies an endorsement of the brutal violence and collective punishment inflicted upon” Palestinians in Gaza.

Thirteen countries supported the resolution, while the U.K.—which has veto power, like the U.S., China, France, and Russia—abstained from voting.

The vote marked the third time the U.S. has vetoed a cease-fire resolution at the U.N. Security Council (UNSC). Meanwhile, the Biden administration has approved weapons transfers to Israel without the oversight of the U.S. Congress since the assault began in October, and has vehemently defended the bombardment as being focused on defeating Hamas, even as Israel has killed more than 29,000 Palestinians including more than 11,500 children.

“We should ask ourselves: How many innocent lives must be sacrificed before the council deems it necessary to call for a cease-fire?” said Bendjama. “Palestinian lives matter. Each one of us decides where to stand in this tragic chapter of history.”

As the U.S. rejected the cease-fire resolution, Al Jazeera reported on the chaos that has erupted in northern Gaza as Israel has blocked aid trucks from reaching starving civilians there.

The World Food Program (WFP) said Tuesday it was pausing deliveries after crowds of desperate people overwhelmed aid workers.

As Al Jazeera reported, children collected flour that spilled from an aid truck in Gaza City, before Israeli forces began firing on the crowd……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Al Jazeera reported that Palestinians in Gaza expressed anger over the United States’ latest veto.

“There is a great deal of pessimism and frustration. Palestinians no longer trust the international community, as we have been hearing from locals here in Gaza,” correspondent Tareq Abu Azzoum reported from Rafah. “During the Security Council meeting there have been more attacks on the ground here in Gaza. People here are completely frustrated.” https://www.commondreams.org/news/us-vetoes-ceasefire

February 22, 2024 Posted by | weapons and war | Leave a comment

Germany and nuclear weapons: A difficult history

Volker Witting | Rina Goldenberg, 02/17/2024February 17, 2024

Donald Trump’s suggestion the US will no longer apply NATO’s principle of collective defense should he become president again has sent shockwaves through Europe.

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is annoyed by the current debate about European nuclear weapons.“There is no reason to discuss the nuclear umbrella now,” he told public broadcaster ARD.

Ever since Donald Trump suggested that, as US president, he would not provide military assistance to NATO countries if they invested less than 2% of their GDP in their defense, German politicians have been discussing whether French and British nuclear weapons would suffice as a protective shield or whether Europe needs new nuclear weapons.

“The debate about European nuclear weapons is a very German debate that we don’t see in any other country,” political scientist Karl-Heinz Kamp from the German Council on Foreign Relations (DGAP) told DW — especially not in Eastern Europe, where there is a constant perceived threat from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s Russia.

Germany has a special history: Germany was “seen as an intrinsically aggressive country, that had started two world wars and could not be trusted with nuclear weapons,” said Kamp.

Germany-based nukes during the Cold War

In 1954, not long after the end of World War II, the first chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany, Konrad Adenauer, signed an agreement renouncing the production of its own nuclear, biological or chemical weapons on its territory. In return, the US included West Germany in its nuclear deterrence policy against the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact.

In 1958, the German parliament, the Bundestag, approved the deployment of US nuclear weapons, despite some pacifist protests among the population. In 1960, 1,500 US nuclear warheads were stored in West Germany and a further 1,500 in the rest of Western Europe.

The nuclear weapons were also available to the Bundeswehr for training and use in the “case of defense.” “There was never any discussion about Germany acquiring its own nuclear weapons,” said Kamp.

The West German and European peace movements grew. The protest against the “NATO Dual-Track Decision” in 1982 saw over a million people in West Germany take to the streets in protest against the planned stationing of new US medium-range missiles in the country.

Nevertheless, on November 22, 1983, a center-right majority in the Bundestag approved the stationing of the missiles in US bases shortly thereafter. At the time, the Greens were newly represented in the Bundestag and appealed to the Federal Constitutional Court against the storing and deployment of nuclear missiles on West German territory. This bid was rejected as unfounded in December 1984.

During the Cold War, East Germany, the communist German Democratic Republic (GDR), was part of the Warsaw Pact military alliance, and from 1958, nuclear missiles and warheads were stationed in Soviet military bases on GDR territory. Some were withdrawn in 1988 as part of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty between the US and the Soviet Union.

After German reunification and the withdrawal of the Soviet military, the territory of the former GDR officially became free of nuclear weapons in 1991.

Post-Cold War Germany

After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the division between East and West Germany, the German position was once again cemented in the so-called “Two-Plus-Four Treaty”: No nuclear weapons! On September 12, 1990, the four victorious powers of World War II (the US, the Soviet Union, France and UK) stipulated that Germany East and West should be reunified and renounce nuclear weapons.

Kamp says this was hardly surprising, because “a German nuclear power would be something that would cause horror. For historical reasons alone.”

The US government withdrew many of these nuclear warheads after the collapse of the Soviet Union, though an estimated 180 US nuclear weapons are still stored in Europe, in Italy, Turkey, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany.

Experts believe that 20 US nuclear warheads are currently stored in the town of Büchel in Rhineland-Palatinate, western Germany. “But the decision-making authority over these weapons lies solely with the American president,” explained Kamp.

Any debate about Germany acquiring its own nuclear weapons is completely unrealistic, says political scientist Peter Rudolf from the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Nuclear bombs need to be stored so that they are not easy targets, he told the Frankfurter Allgemeine daily.

“Survivable nuclear weapons would have to be on nuclear-powered submarines that can remain underwater for a very long time, he said, pointing to equipment the Bundeswehr does not have. “So there are so many problems standing in the way of a German nuclear bomb that it has no relevance to current crises,” Rudolf concluded.

“Those who are now talking about a European defense dimension are not talking about German nuclear weapons, because Germany is a member of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and has made several binding commitments under international law to renounce the possession of weapons of mass destruction — including nuclear weapons,” agreed Kamp.

Defense Minister Pistorius, meanwhile, who made headlines not so long ago saying Germany should get “war-ready”, is now keen to brush the whole debate aside: He told ARD that “the majority of those in charge in the United States of America know exactly what they have in their transatlantic partners in Europe, what they have in NATO.”

And Kamp agrees: “Trump may be able to damage NATO considerably, but he cannot destroy it. You can’t destroy decades of transatlantic relations in one term of office.”

Edited by Ben Knight and Peter Hille

February 21, 2024 Posted by | Germany, history, Reference, weapons and war | Leave a comment

UK could contribute to nuclear shield if Trump wins, suggests German minister

Comments draw Britain into debate about European security without US providing bulk of Nato’s nuclear deterrent

Patrick Wintour, Guardian, 19 Feb 24,

The UK could contribute to a new European nuclear shield if Donald Trump becomes US president again, a senior German minister has suggested, drawing British politicians into the debate about how Europe’s security could be bolstered in the event of the Republican frontrunner winning in November.

Questions over a European nuclear deterrence have intensified after Trump’s remarks on Saturday that he would not defend any Nato member that failed to spend 2% of its gross domestic product on defence – and would even encourage Russia to continue attacking.

European leaders have interpreted the comments as a warning that the alliance’s largely US nuclear shield can no longer be taken for granted if Trump returns to the White House. On Tuesday, Christian Lindner, the German finance minister and the leader of the Free Democratic party, called on politicians to consider an alternative model that could include British and French nuclear weapons……………………………………………………………..

The central issue in the nuclear debate is less whether Britain or France would put their nuclear weapons at the disposal of the EU, but whether the two countries could agree to put them at the service of a deterrence strategy for Nato’s European alliance area.

Although France keeps its nuclear deterrent outside the Nato command structure, Macron has offered to cooperate with Europe on nuclear defence. In 2020, he called for a “strategic dialogue” on “the role of France’s nuclear deterrent in [Europe’s] collective security”. Germany never took up that offer……………………………………………………………………………………..

The UK has said its nuclear weapons would be available for use at the request of Nato’s supreme allied commander Europe, the alliance’s most senior uniformed officer, and that they would only be used “in extreme circumstances of self-defence including the defence of our Nato allies”.

This offer, however, was made in the context of a US nuclear presence in Europe.

The Labour party has promised to intensify defence cooperation with Europe, including a commitment by the shadow defence secretary, John Healey, to reach an agreement with Germany within the first six months of taking office. But this modest pledge had nothing to do with the sharing of Britain’s nuclear deterrent.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/15/uk-europe-nuclear-shield-donald-trump-germany-nato-deterrent

February 21, 2024 Posted by | politics international, weapons and war | Leave a comment

US Threatens to Veto New Gaza Ceasefire Resolution at UN Security Council

The US has vetoed two similar resolutions

by Dave DeCamp February 18, 2024,  https://news.antiwar.com/2024/02/18/us-threatens-to-veto-new-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-at-un-security-council/
—

The US is threatening to veto a resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza at the UN Security Council as the US continues to provide political cover for the Israeli massacre of Palestinians.

US Ambassador to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield said in a statement that if the resolution, which is being drafted by Algeria, was brought to a vote, it would not be adopted.

Thomas-Greenfield justified US opposition to a ceasefire by pointing to US efforts to push for a new hostage deal between Israel and Hamas. However, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu vetoed hostage talks last week, and Qatar, the mediator of the negotiations, said Saturday that things were not looking “promising.”

Thomas-Greenfield said Algeria’s resolution would “run counter” to US efforts on the hostage deal. “We have communicated this concern repeatedly to our colleagues on the Council. For that reason, the United States does not support action on this draft resolution. Should it come up for a vote as drafted, it will not be adopted,” she said.

The US has already used its veto power on the Security Council to veto two resolutions calling for an end to the onslaught. The Biden administration has also dismissed the International Court of Justice’s ruling that it’s “plausible” Israel is committing genocide and continues to provide unconditional military support for the slaughter.

Thomas-Greenfield said the resolution would get in the way of US “diplomacy” related to pushing for a hostage deal. “It is critical that other parties give this process the best odds of succeeding, rather than push measures that put it — and the opportunity for an enduring resolution of hostilities — in jeopardy,” she said.

February 20, 2024 Posted by | Israel, politics international, USA, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Is there really a nuclear weapon in space?

CASSANDRA STEER, The Interpreter, 18 Feb 24

Calm down, Congressman.

Alarm was raised in the media this week about a “national security threat” to the United States from Russia, ostensibly a nuclear space-based weapon. The news came after the Republican chair of the US House of Representatives intelligence committee, Mike Turner, unusually went public with an allegation based on classified intelligence that had not yet been properly discussed across the National Security briefing channels.

The fact that a cryptic, public allegation was made about a threat in space, combined with repetitions of one unnamed source referring to a potential nuclear capability, has led to some sensationalised news articles, and a lot of misleading conclusions, that Russia has a nuclear space weapon. Lack of clarity can lead to misunderstanding, misinterpretations, and possible missteps, which are in fact the biggest threats to space security.

This news is useful in terms of raising awareness of the high stakes in space security. But as became clear when White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby spoke earlier today, this potential capability does “not pose an urgent threat to the United States”– i.e.: it doesn’t yet exist.

We do know all the great powers, many middle powers and even smaller nations are developing counter-space capabilities, most of which are non-kinetic, and the most effective of which have temporary, but highly impactful effects. But this is not “Star Wars”, there are no space-based nuclear weapons.

Space is critical to national, regional and international security, because of how integral space-based services are to civil life and military operations. Satellites have been key military sources of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) since the 1960s, and continue to be so today. Space-based communications, internet and navigation (such as GPS) are part of our daily lives without most of us thinking about where they come from, and they are a major source of military communications, operational navigation on land, at sea and in the air, as well as guidance for precision weapons.

Because of these high dependencies, space has itself become a strategic domain. In recent decades, increasingly sophisticated counter-space capabilities have been developed globally to interfere with these systems. The most effective way to compromise an adversary’s eyes and ears is to interfere with their space systems, whether by jamming a signal, listening in on a signal, spoofing a false positioning signal, or undertaking a cyberattack on a satellite operation. These are all temporary, reversible means of targeting a satellite or the signals and data it sends to Earth. There is a reason these means are preferred over kinetic, destructive means.

Nuclear weapons (and weapons of mass destruction) are the only type of weapon prohibited in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, in article IV. The Soviets and the United States, together with many other countries, were able to agree on this treaty at the height of the Cold War, because they realised that strategic restraint was the only way to ensure they would both continue to have access to this new critical domain. In other words, after their own nuclear and Electro-Magnetic Pulse tests in the 1960s, they realised there was no way to contain the effects of such weapons, and their own capabilities would be impacted. A lose-lose scenario.

Perhaps the strongest lessons came from the US nuclear test known as Starfish Prime, which took out US, UK and other national satellite capabilities, reaching from the east coast of the United States to Australia. US and Soviet decision-makers realised they needed to secure their own access to space by prohibiting such weapons, and other countries pushed to ensure these superpowers would not take nuclear war to space, denying access to space for others………………………………………………………………………………. more https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/there-really-nuclear-weapon-space

February 20, 2024 Posted by | space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Egypt Building Walled Camp in Sinai Desert to Absorb Palestinian Refugees from Gaza

Israel will likely try to push Palestinians from Rafah into the camp

by Dave DeCamp February 15, 2024 https://news.antiwar.com/2024/02/15/egypt-building-walled-camp-in-sinai-desert-to-take-palestinian-refugees-from-gaza/
Egypt is building an 8-square-mile walled enclosure in the Sinai Desert near Gaza to prepare for an influx of Palestinian refugees as Israel is vowing to launch an assault on Rafah, which borders Egypt and is packed with about 1.5 million Palestinians.

The revelation of Egypt’s construction, which was reported by The Wall Street Journal and an Egyptian rights group, signals Cairo is caving to Israeli pressure to allow Palestinians to enter its territory.

Egyptian officials told the Journal that more than 100,000 people would be able to fit into the camps they are constructing. If a mass exodus of Palestinians from Gaza does happen, the Egyptian officials said they want to limit the number of refugees they allow in to between 50,000 and 60,000.

The Sinai Foundation for Human Rights first reported on the construction on Wednesday and said the project is expected to be completed within 10 days. Egyptian officials told the Journal they expect a broad Israeli offensive on Rafah could start “within weeks.” Israel must be aware of the construction and will likely try to push as many Palestinians into the camp as it can.

Israeli government officials have not been shy about their desire to cleanse the Gaza Strip of its Palestinian population and re-establish Jewish settlements. A document prepared by Israel’s Intelligence Ministry that was leaked back in October said the best-case scenario for Israel would be to send all 2.3 million Palestinians living in Gaza into Egypt.

But Cairo’s opposition to the plan caused Israeli officials to look elsewhere and suggest Western countries take in Palestinian refugees. According to Israeli media, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu previously said he was looking for countries to “absorb” Palestinians, but he’s cooled the rhetoric since the Biden administration criticized other Israeli ministers for making similar comments.

February 19, 2024 Posted by | Egypt, Israel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

‘Everyone needs to calm down’: experts assess Russian nuclear space threat

Attacks in Earth’s orbit as likely to damage Russian interests as western ones, says leading academic

Nicola Davis , 15 Feb 24, Guardian,

Rumours that Russia is planning to deploy nuclear weapons in space have been dampened down by experts who say that while such technology is possible, there is no need to push the panic button.

The furore kicked off on Wednesday when the head of the US House of Representatives’ intelligence committee, Mike Turner, called for the Biden administration to declassify information on what he called a “serious national security threat”.

While Turner gave no further details, it was later reported by news outlets, citing unnamed sources, to involve Russia’s potential deployment of a nuclear anti-satellite weapon in space. The Kremlin dismissed the claim as a “malicious fabrication”.

Dr Bleddyn Bowen, an associate professor at the University of Leicester who specialises in outer space international relations and warfare, said the the lack of detail was no reason to panic. “It’s so vague and cryptic, it could be a number of different things. [But] no matter what they are, none of them are a big deal, to be honest. Everyone needs to calm down about this.”

Russia is bound by several legal restrictions regarding the use or presence of nuclear weapons in space. Article 4 of the Outer Space treaty (1967) bans nuclear weapons from being put into orbit, installed on celestial bodies or otherwise stationed in outer space, while the New Start treaty aims to reduce the number of deployable nuclear arms. The Partial Nuclear Test Ban treaty (1963) bans nuclear explosions in space.

Even if Russia ignores these agreements, there are other considerations. Bowen said the rumoured threat may relate to nuclear-tipped anti-satellite weapons but that such a threat was nothing new.

“These are the first and the most crude kind of anti-satellite weapons ever built: the Americans had them in 1959.” He said any state with nuclear weapons already had the technology to use them in space, broadly speaking.

Another possibility, Bowen said, was that the threat related to space-based nuclear weapons that could be used to knock out satellites. Again, the idea is not entirely new: Russia has previously explored the stationing of nuclear weapons in space, albeit to attack ground targets……………………………………………………………………………………

Space-based nuclear weapons are vulnerable to attack from other nations, while the damage from such weapons would be indiscriminate.

“When you detonate a nuclear weapon in space you generate the fireball … but what you [also] generate is the electromagnetic pulse which fries the electrical circuits of anything that’s unshielded within a few thousand kilometres’ radius,” he said. The pulse may also knock out power grids on Earth if the bomb is detonated above or near populated areas.

“After that, you have the radiation that the bomb would generate,” Bowen said. Over time it would fry the electrical circuits of satellites in the wider part of Earth’s orbit.

The loss of satellite services could affect myriad systems on Earth, from telecoms to satellite navigation services. “That can have knock-on effects to the economy, to critical infrastructure, to the financial system, which relies on these satellites.”

In other words, while nuclear bombs could take out a desired satellites, they could also damage Russia’s technology and interests.

“You’ve got to be in a very desperate situation to want to do something like that,” he said. “So I am not losing any sleep over this.”

Russia also has other technology to hand. In 2021 Russia tested a direct-ascent anti-satellite missile, successfully knocking out one of its own defunct satellites.

But James Green, a professor of public international law at the University of the West of England, said he was also dubious that that system would be deployed. “I think Russia likes to project its space power [to appear] greater than it probably is,” he said.
 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/15/experts-russian-nuclear-space-threat

February 18, 2024 Posted by | Russia, space travel, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Ukraine set to lose key Donbass city – White House

 https://www.rt.com/russia/592511-key-donbass-city-loss/

With Russia poised to capture Avdeevka, US National Security Council spokesman John Kirby has called on Congress to give Kiev more ammunition

Russian forces are preparing to capture the Donbass stronghold of Avdeevka after “particularly intense” fighting, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby told reporters on Thursday. 

Situated just ten kilometers north of Donetsk, Avdeevka had been used by the Ukrainian military as a staging ground for attacks on the city since 2014, many of which targeted civilians. They constructed deep bunkers there, with Russian military bloggers comparing the town to a “fortress.”

Fighting around Avdeevka is “particularly intense,” Kirby said at a press conference. “We’re getting reports from the Ukrainians that the situation is critical, the Russians continuing to press Ukrainian positions every single day,” he stated, adding that “Avdeevka is at risk of falling into Russian control.”

It is unclear how many troops Kiev has lost attempting to hold Avdeevka. Kirby linked the impending fall of the town to ammunition shortages, a problem well documented by Western media in recent months. The White House spokesman called on Congress to pass a bill that would give Ukraine a $60 billion infusion of military aid, stating that this would “provide Ukraine with the artillery shells that they desperately need to disrupt these Russian assaults.”

While the US Senate passed the bill earlier this week, it remains a non-starter in the House of Representatives, where the slim Republican majority have demanded that it include a major tightening of US immigration law and “real border security provisions,” according to House Speaker Mike Johnson. 

Ukraine appears determined to hold Avdeevka at all costs, with President Vladimir Zelensky naming Aleksandr Syrsky – a general infamous for tolerating severe losses – as commander-in-chief of his armed forces last week. Syrsky immediately deployed Ukraine’s 3rd Assault Brigade – an elite Western-armed unit made up of the remnants of the neo-Nazi Azov regiment – to Avdeevka, where they relieved the beleaguered and depleted 110th Mechanized Brigade.

While Ukrainian officials have not conceded defeat in Avdeevka, German reporter Julian Roepcke claimed on Thursday that “the Ukrainian army is in the process of pulling out,” while Russian forces are “quickly advancing inside and around the town.” According to Roepcke, the Russian flag is now flying at the entrance to the town, at the same spot where Zelensky took a selfie during a publicity visit in December. 

February 18, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

Cut in Half by Russians, Avdiivka is Reinforced by Ukrainian Nazi Azov Battalion – Massive Missile Strike on Reinforcements Causes Some Defenders to Withdraw

The heavily fortified frontline town of Avdiivka, split in two by Russian forces, witnesses some of the Ukrainian defenders begin to retreat of some areas to ‘more favorable positions’.

The supply lines of the AFU in the southern sector are now under extreme pressure.

Besides the multi-pronged ground attack that is overextending the defenses, a reason for the rapid advance of the Russian forces in Avdiivka is the aerial support: a FAB guided munition drops almost immediately on any place where a concentration of Ukrainian military is spotted.

Telegram channel Ukraine Watch reported that in the first third of February alone, the Russian Aerospace Forces dropped about 460 aerial bombs on the positions of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. This includes FAB-250/500/1500 and ODAB.

his partial folding of the defenses is a bit surprising because up until a couple of days ago, the New Ukrainian commander Syrsky was still rumored to be withdrawing elite units from the Rabotino and Verbove fronts to immediately reinforce Avdiivka.

This reportedly includes more of the 47th as well as the 3rd Assault Brigade, better known as the Nazi ‘Azov’ battalion.

These brigades were thrown directly into the center of battle.

Simplicius the Thinker reported:

“After witnessing the nightmare of Bakhmut, they [Ukrainians] now understand what awaits the soldiers in Avdiivka. But what’s most interesting, is you’ll recall that their narrative was previously that Bakhmut was a ‘successful operation’ because it allegedly grinded down such a disproportionate number of Russian troops, that the city defense served its purpose. But when that truth is put to the test in reality, Ukrainians instead recognize that it’s actually them getting ground down amid desperate calls for withdrawal. If Bakhmut was such a ‘success’, then they would be happy to keep their men in Avdiivka and inflict another such ‘success’ against Russian attackers.”……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Ukraine Watch reported:

“The current situation can be described as difficult. That is, the enemy is now advancing practically along the entire front line, and we have switched from offensive actions to a defensive operation. And the aim of our defensive operation is to exhaust the enemy’s forces, to inflict maximum losses on him, using our fortifications, our technical advantages in the use of unmanned aerial vehicles, electronic warfare and the maintenance of prepared defensive lines. The situation at the front was very tense, with the enemy making offensive movements in several directions, in fact all along the line of sight of my group.”

And finally, today, Intel Slava reported that the Ukrainian army is retreating to ‘more advantageous positions’ in Avdiivka, according to Dmitry Likhovy, speaker of the Tavria Armed Forces of Ukraine group.

“In Avdiivka, a maneuver is taking place where our units are withdrawing to more advantageous positions. Supplies to Avdiivka and evacuation from there are difficult. But a reserve logistics artery, prepared in advance, is being used.”  https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/cut-half-russians-avdiivka-is-reinforced-ukrainian-nazi/


February 18, 2024 Posted by | Ukraine, weapons and war | Leave a comment

« Previous Entries     Next Entries »