Arctic Hasn’t Gotten Enough in Past Pentagon Budgets, VanHerck Says. Will That Change in 2023?

Arctic Hasn’t Gotten Enough in Past Pentagon Budgets, VanHerck Says. Will That Change in 2023?

March 25, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

U.S. Northern Command boss Gen. Glen D. VanHerck, who has pushed for the Pentagon to allocate more resources to the Arctic region in its annual budget, hopes to see a “significant” funding boost for domain awareness in 2023.

Speaking before the Senate Armed Services Committee on March 24, just four days before the 2023 budget request is released, VanHerck fielded plenty of questions from lawmakers concerned about the Arctic, a region of increasing importance where the melting ice cap, natural resources, and shipping lanes are all contested by the U.S., Russia, and even China, among other nations.

In June 2021, VanHerck told the Congressional panel that the budget only “inched” progress forward in the region, adding that “we didn’t move the ball very far down the field this year in the budget with regards to resources in the Arctic.”

Nine months later, his concerns about investments remain.

“We have not seen the funding that I would like to see with regards to the Arctic,” VanHerck told Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska).

Sullivan then noted, as VanHerck also has, that the services are at least paying more attention to the region—the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, and Department of the Air Force have all released strategic plans for the Arctic, some for the very first time, in the past few years.

But thus far, the money hasn’t matched those strategies, Sullivan and VanHerck said.

“I look forward to seeing the ‘23 budget,” VanHerck said. “The Arctic is strategic in nature. We must be persistent there to compete. That’s a part of … integrated deterrence.”

The Pentagon will rollout the fiscal 2023 budget request on March 28, and VanHerck indicated he hadn’t yet seen what it entails for the Arctic.

“Without seeing the ‘23 budget, I really can’t give you a full assessment of what we’re going to see for infrastructure support. I believe we will see additional domain awareness capabilities significantly funded with the ‘23 budget, but I look forward to seeing that,” VanHerck said. “I would assess that there may still be some work to do with regards to the strategies that each of the services have … put out, and the department strategy. But when the budget comes out, I’ll give you the final assessment.”

Domain awareness in the Arctic has been a stated priority for DOD for several years now. Billy Mitchell famously said that, “Alaska is the most central place in the world for aircraft operations.” It is closer to China than Hawaii, where Pacific Air Forces is headquarters is located, and when the ice freezes over in the winter, there are places where you can actually walk from U.S. to Russian territory.

But operating in the Arctic is always a challenge due to the harsh conditions and relative lack of infrastructure. There are actually more roads in the state of New Jersey, than there are in all of Alaska, even though if if placed Alaska on a map of the lower 48 it would stretch from Jacksonville, Fla., to San Francisco, Lt. Gen. David A. Krumm, the most senior military officer in Alaska, told Air Force Magazine.

Infrastructure is one area where VanHerck sees a need for investment, so the U.S. can continue to be a persistent presence in the region.

“We do need a presence, and fuel north of Dutch Harbor would do that, as would infrastructure and communications capabilities,” VanHerck said. “I look forward to working with the Canadians on their part of this. They need to be part of it as well, not only the Department of Defense, especially on the infrastructure piece.”

Both Russia and China, which is not technically an Arctic nation, have become increasingly aggressive in asserting their presence in the region.

“The Chinese are active in the Arctic,” VanHerck told lawmakers. “Each of the last five years, they’ve sent a vessel under the guise of a research vessel into the Arctic for military purposes, we assess. … And so they’re there. They’re influencing nations, they want to change and influence international norms and behavior as well.”

There is also the threat that Russia and China could pose by launching a missile to fly over the region to strike the U.S. In such a crisis, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine) pressed VanHerck on how he would coordinate with other combatant commands.

“I’m comfortable with the way the unified campaign plan is currently laid out. We have outstanding relationships with Canada, outstanding relationships with [U.S. European Command] and [U.S. Indo-Pacific Command]. I do think we need to look at, based on threat changes, how we would command and control those capabilities,” VanHerck replied.

“The threats to the homeland today do not reside in my area of responsibility. They are actually existing in other areas of responsibility, such as the INDOPACOM area of responsibility and the EUCOM area of responsibility. So I do think there’s potential gaps and seams that we need to make sure that we close those in a time of crisis and conflict to ensure we don’t have challenges that were unaccounted for.”

Gen. Charles G. Boyd, Former POW, Dies at 83

Gen. Charles G. Boyd, Former POW, Dies at 83

March 24, 2022 | By John A. Tirpak

Gen. Charles G. Boyd, the only Vietnam-era prisoner of war to become a four-star general, died March 23 at the age of 83. Boyd was also a former vice commander of 8th Air Force, commander of Air University, and deputy commander of U.S. European Command.

Born in Iowa, Boyd entered the Air Force in 1959 through the aviation cadet program. He learned to fly the F-100 Super Sabre and F-105 Thunderchief, and was deployed to Southeast Asia in November 1965.

On April 22, 1966, Boyd volunteered for an unusually dangerous mission to attack surface-to-air missile sites around Hanoi, the North Vietnamese capital, in an F-105D. According to his citation for the Air Force Cross—the highest decoration after the Medal of Honor—Boyd, on his 105th mission over the North, bravely pressed the attack repeatedly through heavy enemy fire, including close calls with two SAMS. After repeated passes, he was hit. Ejecting at high speed, the force of the wind tore his helmet off, and shortly after landing in a rice paddy, he was captured.

Boyd spent the next seven years as a prisoner of the North Vietnamese, enduring torture, brutal interrogation, solitary confinement, malnutrition, and illness. For 18 months, he was imprisoned adjacent to Navy flyer John McCain, who later became a U.S. senator and Republican presidential candidate.

Boyd was among the 50 or so prisoners forced to walk through the capital in the 1966 “Hanoi March,” a propaganda event in which downed pilots were humiliated and struck by civilians lining the march route, showing that Hanoi refused to be bound by the Geneva Convention banning such treatment.

Boyd was repatriated in 1973 after the signing of the Paris Peace Accords. He resumed his Air Force career, taking four years to heal up from his injuries, earn a bachelor’s and master’s degree from the Air Force Institute of Technology, and attend the Air War College. Due to malnutrition during his captivity, Boyd’s eyesight wasn’t good enough to allow him to resume USAF flying duties, although he flew private aircraft for many years afterwards.

Over the next 12 years, Boyd rose rapidly through the ranks, holding staff and command assignments in the Pentagon and Europe. From December 1986 until June of 1988 he was vice commander of 8th Air Force; from 1990-1992 he commanded Air University; and in his last post he was deputy commander-in-chief of U.S. European Command, retiring in August 1995 as a four-star general.

Boyd remained an active voice in national security after his Air Force career. He served as a strategy consultant to Rep. Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House; and in 1998, he served as director of the Hart-Rudman commission assessing U.S. security needs for the 21st century. Seven months before the 9/11 attacks, the panel presciently called for the creation of a federal department much like the eventual Department of Homeland Security to monitor terrorism and protect against it.

He later became senior vice president of the Council on Foreign Relations, as its Washington program director. He also worked as a director at various defense and intelligence-oriented companies, was CEO of the Business Executives for National Security, and was chair of the Center for the National Interest think tank.

Boyd wrote that fighter pilots were uniquely suited to endure the ravages of being POWs, as they were accustomed to facing battle relying almost entirely on their own wits and resources.

“It should not seem surprising that this breed of men would be as well-equipped as anyone to cope with the special problems of isolation,” Boyd said. The enemy “thought they could ‘divide and conquer;’ that without collective leadership we would not be able to maintain our resistance and resolve. But they did not reckon with the individual integrity of the American fighter pilot.” The endurance of American POWs in Vietnam is “a testimony to the individual spirit,” Boyd said. “We returned with our mental health …because the highest degree of achievement is possible only when man is imbued with a spirit of individualism.”

Air Force Association President, retired Lt. Gen. Bruce “Orville” Wright, said “Gen. Boyd was an inspirational figure, in his warrior spirit, his incredible endurance under brutal conditions, and his intellectual gifts to the national security community. An exemplary leader for generations of Airmen, he inspired us in every encounter.”

Retired Lt. Gen. David A. Deptula, dean of AFA’s Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, worked for Boyd from 1988 to 1989 and remained in contact with him throughout his life. “Gen. Boyd was a giant of an Airman” who “exuded thoughtfulness in all the aspects of the word,” Deptula said. “From the perspective of complete evaluation of all aspects of a situation, to the empathy of man who had consideration for others’ perspectives. … He took me flying in his T-34 not that long ago, and he was at home in the air. May he Rest In Peace in his final resting place in the clouds. He was a true warrior, scholar, leader, Airman, and will be dearly missed.”

Hackers Attacked Satellite Terminals Through Management Network, Viasat Officials Say

Hackers Attacked Satellite Terminals Through Management Network, Viasat Officials Say

March 24, 2022 | By Shaun Waterman

The cyberattack that cut communications for thousands of European users of Viasat’s satellite broadband service last month was carried out by hackers compromising and exploiting the system that manages customer terminals, two Viasat officials told Air Force Magazine.

The attack, which happened as Russian forces rolled into Ukraine on Feb. 24, affected tens of thousands of terminals in Ukraine and across Europe, which were part of the KA-SAT network, a satellite broadband asset that Viasat bought last year from French satcom giant Eutelsat. End users affected included some in the Ukrainian military, and the attack dramatically demonstrated the vulnerability of commercial satellite communications capabilities on which the U.S. military increasingly relies.

“The terminal management network … that manages the KA-SAT network, and manages other Eutelsat networks—that network was penetrated,” said one Viasat official. “And from there, the hackers were able to launch an attack against the terminals using the normal function of the management plane of the network.”

The official added that Viasat shared information about the hack with DOD and law enforcement agencies. Viasat is one of the commercial satcom companies that are part of the Commercial Integration Cell, or CIC. Located at Vandenberg Space Force Base, Calif., the CIC is based in the Combined Space Operations Center, part of U.S. Space Command, and exists to share “real‐time and near real‐time information … during daily routine operations and to enable rapid, informed response to critical unplanned space events,” according to a fact sheet from Vandenberg public affairs.

Under the transition agreement governing the KA-SAT acquisition, the KA-SAT networks had continued to be managed by Skylogic SPA, an Italian subsidiary of Eutelsat, along with other Eutelsat networks, the Viasat officials said.

The first official contended that the attack would not have succeeded on the global network directly managed by Viasat. “The controls that we have on our … Viasat operated networks would have stopped this. These events that we saw on this [KA-SAT] network, the same effects would not have worked on our global network.”

The Viasat officials said that the attack did not affect users of the KA-SAT network who bought their broadband directly from Viasat, only users inherited as part of the Eutelsat deal.

“Even on that [KA-SAT] network, none of our mobility and none of our government customers were affected—the controls we have around those users kept them safe,” said the first official.

Although the timing of the attack—as Russian tanks rolled across the border—might appear highly suggestive, the Viasat officials said they were not in a position to attribute it to any particular actor.

This week, a senior White House official told reporters that the U.S. government was not yet making any public attribution, either. “We have not yet attributed that attack, but we’re carefully looking at it because … of the impact not only in Ukraine but also in satellite communication systems in Europe as well,” Deputy National Security Adviser for Cyber and Emerging Technologies Anne Neuberger said at a briefing March 21.

She added that the sophistication of the attack, along with its timing, were “certainly factors that … we’re looking at carefully as we look at who is responsible.”

The attack compromised the management plane—the part of the network that controls customer terminals to ensure they can communicate with the satellite, the Viasat officials said. The hackers had abused that functionality to change the software configuration on the terminals and render them inoperable.

But, contrary to some early reports, the attack did not brick the terminals. “It did not make them permanently inoperable,” said the second official. “Every single terminal that was knocked off the air can be brought back with a software update.” Although the network is generally capable of updating terminals over the air, by downloading new software via the satellite link, many of the terminals attacked cannot be brought back online by the customer, and so can’t get the required update over the air. Those will have to be updated by tech support staff, the first official said.

Viasat is replacing some terminals altogether, but only as a matter of convenience, the first official added. “In some cases, it’s easier to just ship new terminals than it is to send a tech out. So there’s a combination of some we’re restoring over the air, some where a tech has to come out and restore, and some where we’re just shipping new terminals.”

Viasat has not disclosed the exact number of terminals affected, but the second official said it was “tens of thousands.” The company said no customer or end-user data was compromised.

Viasat’s response to the hack had been complicated by a number of factors, the officials said. KA-SAT had been a “bandwidth wholesaler,” making deals with distributors and resellers in each European market.

“In the case of the Ukrainian military, in some instances, but also some other users in other countries, they bought commercial [satcom] services through the distributors and then used them for the military,” said the first official. “Because of the distributor relationship, there was a level of abstraction between us and those customers. And so we didn’t even necessarily know who the customers were, or how they were using these assets.”

Moreover, the fact that the distributors had the customer relationship with the end user complicated the process of refurbishing or replacing the inoperable terminals, the first official added. “As we restore the terminals, we send them to the distributors, and it’s the distributors’ responsibility to send them to the users.” Some distributors were “fantastic. And they get them right out to the users.” Others faced challenges due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic or other factors and are “sitting on them in their warehouses.”

Despite this, Viasat was now bringing “thousands of terminals back online per day, and will have the network completely restocked and back to full capacity within a few weeks,” the first official said.

The attack prompted a warning to U.S. satellite operators from the FBI and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, or CISA, the DHS agency responsible for working with the private sector to protect vital American industries such as telecommunications and health care.

Editor’s Note: This story was updated at 3:15 p.m. on March 25 to correct some technical issues with how the KA-SAT network and other assets were described.

Whiteman B-2 Flies to Australia and Back, Conducts Training with RAAF

Whiteman B-2 Flies to Australia and Back, Conducts Training with RAAF

March 24, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

A B-2 bomber flew from Whiteman Air Force Base, Mo., to Australia and back over the course of more than 50 hours recently, integrating with five different fighter aircraft from the U.S. Air Force and the Royal Australian Air Force along the way. 

The B-2 Spirit from the 509th Bomb Wing became on March 23 the first such bomber to land at Royal Australian Air Force Base Amberley, Pacific Air Forces announced in a press release.

While in Australian airspace, the B-2 refueled from a KC-135 tanker from the Alaska Air National Guard, then integrated with American F-16Cs and Australian F-35s, EA-18 Growlers, and F/A-18F Super Hornets as part of training operations.

U.S. Indo-Pacific Command boss Adm. John C. Aquilino and Royal Australian Air Force Air Vice-Marshal Joe Iervasi were on hand to observe the B-2 on the ground after it landed. After a crew change, the bomber took off again, integrating with American F-22s from Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Hawaii, before returning home to Whiteman.

“This is the most consequential theater with the most challenging security issues, … and advancing our interoperability with critical allies like Australia is critical to maintaining a free and open Indo-Pacific,” Aquilino said in a statement. “There are many aspects that are going on daily to continue to move the security relationship forward in a positive way to provide deterrence, prevent war, and maintain peace and stability within the region.” 

In a Facebook post, Whiteman officials said the B-2 was assigned to the 393rd Bomb Squadron and that the mission lasted a total of 53 hours.

B-2s have flown training missions over Australia several times over the past few years. In 2020, Whiteman B-2s deployed to Naval Support Facility Diego Garcia and then flew over Australian training areas while Marines and Australian troops trained together to control the strikes. In 2016, a B-2 from Whiteman landed at Royal Australian Air Force Base Tindal.

A B-1B Lancer also flew over Australia in 2021 to train with RAAF tankers. B-1 Lancers also operated out of Diego Garcia for the first time in 15 years this past fall.

Biden Promises Response if Russia Uses Chemical Weapons in Ukraine, Calls for Continued NATO Unity

Biden Promises Response if Russia Uses Chemical Weapons in Ukraine, Calls for Continued NATO Unity

March 24, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

President Joe Biden warned that the United States will respond if Russia uses chemical weapons against Ukraine. Biden also promised to take in 100,000 Ukrainian refugees, provide $1 billion in humanitarian support to Ukraine, and a impose a new round of sanctions against Russian politicians, entities, and defense companies.

“Putin was banking on NATO being split,” said Biden, in Europe accompanied by Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III.

Biden said he called for the March 24 unscheduled NATO leaders summit, and subsequent meetings with European and G-7 counterparts, in order to keep allies and partners united in the punishing sanctions regiment against Russian President Vladimir Putin since “Russia began its carnage in Ukraine” one month prior, on Feb. 24.

“He didn’t think we could sustain this cohesion. NATO has never, never been more united than it is today,” he added, reflecting on December and January phone calls with Putin. “Putin is getting exactly the opposite of what he intended to have as a consequence of going into Ukraine.”

Biden also said he is working with European leaders on ways the United States can provide food and energy security amid worries created by the Russia-Ukraine war. Both Russia and Ukraine are major providers of wheat to Europe, and many European countries depend on Russian oil and gas. The U.S. has ended imports of Russian oil and gas and hopes to export more liquefied natural gas to European ports to help allies reduce their purchase of Russian energy.

The new sanctions against Russia, in unison with the European Union, target more than 400 individuals and entities. Included are more than 300 members of the Russian legislative body Duma, oligarchs, and defense companies.

Biden made note of the more than $2 billion in defense assistance already provided to Ukraine, including air defense systems, armor, and ammunition that continues to flow into Ukraine through a variety of secret overland routes from NATO eastern flank countries. The President announced no new defense package or materials, and the $800 million package of additional military support, signed March 16, has yet to begin delivery.

Biden also said 100,000 Ukrainian refugees will be permitted to immigrate to the United States with a focus on reuniting families. European countries have already absorbed more than 3.5 million refugees from the conflict. Biden is set to travel to Poland, the largest recipient of Ukrainian refugees, March 25 and March 26 for meetings with leaders and to visit refugee camps.

Much speculation has arisen as to the possibility that Biden might somehow try to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, which would require either Zelenskyy to leave the besieged capital or for Biden to fly into an active war zone.

After beginning to describe his itinerary, Biden reversed course and said that he hopes to “see a lot of people.”

The President refused to admit that his early ruling out of direct military intervention before the start of the invasion had emboldened Putin, and he dismissed a reporter’s assertion that American sanctions were meant to deter an invasion by Russia.

“I did not say that … sanctions would deter him. Sanctions never deter,” Biden said, noting that the “maintenance of sanctions” for the entire year would stop Putin.

“The single most important thing is for us to stay unified, and the world to continue to focus on what a brute this guy is, and all the innocent people’s lives that are being lost and ruined,” Biden continued.

On China, Biden said that during his recent call with President Xi Jinping, he made it clear that economic access to the United States and European Union would be “in significant jeopardy” should China choose to provide economic or military assistance to Russia.

The President ended by emphasizing that the alliance must hold strong if it is to stop Putin:

“We have to stay fully, totally, thoroughly united,” he said.

‘Boxed Into a Corner,’ Russia Could Be a Counterspace Wild Card

‘Boxed Into a Corner,’ Russia Could Be a Counterspace Wild Card

March 24, 2022 | By Amanda Miller

China’s space infrastructure has made it more of a military match for the U.S. than Russia, in terms of space, but Russia presents more of an “unknown,” especially as it’s “boxed into a corner” in its invasion of Ukraine, said a top Space Force intelligence officer. 

Maj. Gen. Leah G. Lauderback spoke during the Defense One/Nextgov Intelligence Summit streamed March 24. 

As the Space Force’s senior intelligence officer for its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance “enterprise,” which amounts to about 800 people, she said she tries to instill a “warfighting mentality”—specifically, “How do we defend the capabilities that we have?”

Russia made a dramatic offensive demonstration when it launched a kinetic anti-satellite weapon at one of its own derelict satellites in November 2021, creating a debris field of more than 1,500 objects in low Earth orbit. As of February, that debris was causing so-called “squalls” of conjunctions, or close approaches, with satellites. An estimated 40,000 conjunctions were to take place in the first week of April alone.

Russia also has demonstrated a satellite that flew close to a U.S. satellite, Lauderback said: “They had what we assessed as a counterspace capability essentially flying near one of our capabilities and following us around.”

The Space Force’s role in the Russia-Ukraine war has included gathering intelligence to present to U.S. Space Command and U.S. European Command along with services such as GPS. “It’s battle space awareness. It’s missile warning—it’s things of that nature,” Lauderback said. “Communications. I say that’s a huge one—that we support all the other warfighters out there.”

But an intelligence officer really wants to “understand the adversary,” Lauderback said, and the Space Force is also tasked with “observing, and watching, and being able to try to characterize what is happening in the Ukraine crisis.”

While she gauged China as “more of a rational actor at this point,” she estimated that “Russia is more of an actor that I feel is unknown, and maybe more of a concern, about being boxed into a corner”—a situation in which “you’re not a hundred percent certain what it is that they will do.”

Russia also doesn’t have as high a stake in the orbital environment as the U.S. and China.

“Russia does not use it nearly as much,” Lauderback said. “They are very good at what they do from a space perspective and a counterspace perspective, but they are less dependent on it.”

China, on the other hand, has observed the U.S.’s use of space since it came into play in the Gulf War, and “has truly built a capability and a counter space capability,” making it “truly the challenge” from the Space Force’s perspective.

“I mean, it’s incredible to see,” Lauderback said. “It’s not just about their counterspace—that does threaten us—but it’s also how they use their space capabilities, their intelligence collection capabilities. Because what are they using that for? Of course, they’re using that to track us.”

Unlike Russia’s trend, that advancement could lead to dependency.

The difference, “is that China has an overwhelming capability, and they need it,” she said. “They’re going to be, at some point, dependent on their own use [of] space.” 

North Korea Tests New ICBM; VanHerck Touts Need for Missile Defense

North Korea Tests New ICBM; VanHerck Touts Need for Missile Defense

March 24, 2022 | By Greg Hadley

North Korea test-launched a new intercontinental ballistic missile, officials from Japan and South Korea said March 24, marking North Korea’s first ICBM-range test in years and once again ramping up tensions in the region.

According to a release from the Japanese Ministry of Defense, the launch occurred early that afternoon local time, with the missile flying 71 minutes, reaching an altitude of more than 6,000 kilometers, and landing roughly 1,100 kilometers away in the waters off Japan’s western coast.

South Korea’s Defense Ministry later estimated the missile altitude at 6,200 kilometers and stated that South Korea had launched several missiles in response.

Analysts told multiple media outlets that the March 24 flight data indicates the system could potentially reach the U.S. homeland, exceeding the altitude and flight time of the 2017 test that North Korea said proved it could strike anywhere in the continental U.S.

In 2018, the North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un declared a self-imposed moratorium on long-range missile tests. But in March, the Pentagon revealed that North Korea had twice tested a new ballistic missile system, on Feb. 26 and March 4. Although at the time press secretary John F. Kirby said that the tests “did not demonstrate ICBM range,” he warned they were likely intended to precede a full-range test in the future, “potentially disguised as a space launch.”

At that time, the Pentagon said U.S. Indo-Pacific Command would intensify its intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance efforts and increase its ballistic missile defense readiness.

On March 24, INDOPACOM released a statement, saying the latest launch “does not pose an immediate threat to U.S. personnel, territory, or that of our allies.”

“We are aware of the DPRK’s ballistic missile launch today and are consulting closely with the Republic of Korea and Japan, as well as other allies and partners. The United States condemns these actions and calls on the DPRK to refrain from further destabilizing acts,” the statement adds.

The White House also issued a statement, characterizing the launch as a “test of a long-range ballistic missile” and warning that “the door has not closed on diplomacy, but Pyongyang must immediately cease its destabilizing actions.”

In a March 24 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing, Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) questioned U.S. Northern Command boss Gen. Glen D. VanHerck about his capacity to protect the homeland from a North Korean strike, citing “analysis of the flight path” showing that the missile could hit America.

“I’m comfortable with where we are today, based on the intelligence I have, with the current capabilities and capacity of North Korea,” VanHerck said. “Going forward, I do believe they could exceed my capacity and capabilities. That’s why it’s crucial to keep Next-Generation Interceptor on time or early. In my discussions with [Missile Defense Agency Director Vice Adm. Jon A. Hill], he’s confident right now that they’re on that path.”

The Pentagon awarded contracts to Lockheed Martin and Raytheon for the NGI program, which is scheduled to start fielding in 2028—VanHerck indicated during the hearing that it is possible it could be ready before then.

But the most recent developments from North Korea indicate a need to shore up the current Ground-Based Midcourse Defense system, VanHerck added.

“I am very concerned about my ability to pace the capacity of production that we assess and the capability that we assess the North Koreans continue to adapt to,” VanHerck said. “That’s why the funding for the service life extension program for the current ballistic missile defense capability is so crucial. Thank you for that funding. And that’s why Next-Generation Interceptor is crucial as well, because it will help both get after the additional capacity problems and the capability problems.”

NATO Activates Nuclear Defense Element as Ukraine Prepares for Chemical Attack

NATO Activates Nuclear Defense Element as Ukraine Prepares for Chemical Attack

March 24, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

NATO activated a specialized defense element to protect against a potential mass-casualty chemical, biological, or nuclear weapon attack by Russia in Ukraine. The move came as alliance defense ministers met in Brussels on March 24, promising new types of assistance to Ukraine.

“We are taking measures both to support Ukraine and also to defend ourselves,” said NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg at the conclusion of the leaders summit and before the start of a G-7 meeting.

U.S. government officials have warned that Russia is threatening the use of non-conventional weapons on the battlefield in Ukraine, which Stoltenberg said could affect citizens within NATO’s borders.

“Any use of chemical weapons will totally change the nature of the conflict,” Stoltenberg said. “There’s also a risk that it will have a direct effect on people living in NATO countries, because we can see contamination, we can see the spread of chemical agents or biological weapons into our countries.”

The secretary-general said NATO’s top commander, U.S. Air Force Gen. Tod D. Wolters, activated NATO’s chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) defense element.

“Allies are deploying additional chemical and biological and nuclear defenses to reinforce our existing and new battlegroups,” Stoltenberg said.

A NATO official told Air Force Magazine that activation of the CBRN units from the NATO Response Force involves a battalion-sized force, or about 400 Soldiers.

“They are not deploying right now, but will be put to higher alert,” the official said in a written statement.

U.S. European Command, which Wolters also leads, referred questions by Air Force Magazine to NATO, which declined to provide additional operational details about the CBRN units.

In recent days, U.S. government officials have warned that Russia’s rhetoric heightens the real possibility that Russia would use chemical weapons to compensate for its intransigence on the battlefield.

On the South Lawn of the White House on March 23, President Joe Biden called the danger that Russia could employ chemical weapons “a real threat.”

In a brief to reporters ahead of the NATO meeting, a senior administration official explained that NATO has a Combined Joint CBRN Defence Task Force, which includes specially trained and equipped forces able to deal with the threats posed by chemical, biological, radioactive, and nuclear weapons in the event of attacks against NATO populations, territory, or forces.

In his March 24 briefing, Stoltenberg said the allies had agreed to deliver new CBRN capabilities and training to Ukraine that could include detection equipment, protection and medical support, and training in decontamination and crisis management.

Other measures were taken to strengthen NATO’s eastern flank.

Stoltenberg said the alliance voted to establish four new battle groups in Slovakia, Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary. The four eastern flank battle groups will join four existing battle groups in the Baltic states and Poland as an enhancement to the NATO defense posture. It is unclear yet who will lead the new battle groups. The United States, Germany, Canada, and the United Kingdom already serve as NATO “framework nations,” contributing significant forces and leading the battle groups in Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, respectively, the Defense Department said in a March 24 statement.

Biden said in a statement that the creation of the new battle groups is “a strong signal that we will collectively defend and protect every inch of NATO territory. The President also said that between now and the June NATO summit in Madrid, plans will be developed for “additional forces and capabilities” to strengthen NATO defenses.

Responding to a virtual address by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to the alliance, Biden also promised “significant, and increasing, amounts of security assistance to fight Russian aggression.”

In his address to the alliance, Zelenskyy said resistance to impose a no-fly zone has led to 10 million people becoming migrants, including 3.5 million in NATO countries, as well as the destruction of cities and civilian deaths from air bombardment. Zelenskyy called for NATO to respond as a whole with “military assistance without restrictions.”

“Ukraine asked for your planes so that we do not lose so many people. And you have thousands of fighter jets. But we haven’t been given any yet,” he said, calling for NATO to donate 1 percent of its aircraft and tanks to Ukraine.

Zelenskyy also said that Russia had used phosphorus bombs that day, a possible start of chemical warfare. He warned that Putin intends to go beyond Russia, into the Baltic states and Poland. The Ukrainian President, dressed in a green army fleece, told alliance members they had yet to show “real actions.”

“NATO has yet to show what the alliance can do to save people. To show that this is truly the most powerful defense union in the world,” he said.

Finland Reassesses NATO Entry in Wake of Russia-Ukraine Conflict

Finland Reassesses NATO Entry in Wake of Russia-Ukraine Conflict

March 23, 2022 | By Abraham Mahshie

In the Winter War of 1939, Joseph Stalin looked at Finland and thought he could roll over the country in a matter of days.

Instead, 105 hard-fought and costly winter fighting days between the Soviet Union and Finland passed from December 1939 to March 1940, when Stalin signed a peace deal after heavy losses of personnel and equipment. Finland lost territory but not its independence.

Finland was still recovering from multiple wars with the Soviet Union when the North Atlantic Treaty Organization formed in 1949. Its Nordic neighbor Norway became a founding member, but Finland chose instead to learn to live with Russia, with which it shares an 832-mile border.

Seven decades later, that may change.

Finland has withstood ever-present threats from Russia, investing in its military and building a capable Air Force to protect a dispersed population on territory that spans from the Baltics to the Arctic Sea. In recent years, Finland has grown closer to NATO as an Enhanced Opportunity Partner while retaining its independence. That independence keeps Finland outside of NATO’s Article 5 clause, which guarantees protection of all 30 allies.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine reversed national policies across the continent.

Germany and once-neutral Sweden now provide lethal assistance to Ukraine. And staunchly independent Finland now favors joining NATO for the first time in its history, according to the national Yle poll.

Finland is accustomed to threats from the Russian Federation, but providing military assistance to Ukraine during an active conflict created new risks.

“Finland’s decision-making context is more challenging than most of the countries in Europe because we are living next to Russia,” Finnish air and defense attaché Col. Petteri Seppala told Air Force Magazine in an interview at the Embassy of Finland in Washington, D.C.

“We are not part of NATO. We are not part of Article 5. We don’t live under NATO’s nuclear umbrella,” said Seppala. As a member of the military, Seppala said he does not take a position on whether Finland should join NATO, noting that’s a political decision.

The Finnish airman, a Saab 35 Draken and F-18 pilot, explained that Finland’s geostrategic position next to Russia informs every assessment about its security environment.

Finland
Finnish air and defense attaché Col. Petteri Seppala discusses Finland’s NATO interoperability and enhanced partner status, as well as the risks of providing defense assistance to Ukraine, in an interview at the Embassy of Finland in Washington, D.C., March 18, 2022. Staff photo by Abraham Mahshie.

Finland also has deep experience defending against hybrid threats from Russia, including misinformation and information operations. A highly educated society and a comprehensive defense approach that draws on all sectors have also helped Finland stand up to Russian intimidation.

“That’s a good combination of countering the Russian hybrid warfare,” Seppala said.

“Our defense capabilities are credible. The people in Finland, they think that it’s credible, and people in Russia, they think that it’s credible,” he added. “It tells something about the Finnish spirit. We call it ‘sisu,’ which means that you don’t give up. And we don’t give up.”

NATO Support Grows

Finnish support for joining NATO has traditionally been in the range of 20 percent to 25 percent, but as Russia built up its forces on Ukraine’s border, public support for joining NATO surpassed half the population in February and then hit an all-time high of 62 percent in a March survey.

The Yle poll suggests that if Sweden were to apply for NATO membership, Finnish public support would rise to 77 percent, and if Finland’s political leadership threw their support behind NATO entry, Fins would favor it at a rate of 74 percent.

“We are living in a totally different kind of times. We have never seen anything like this in Finland people,” Seppala said.

Seppala said ever since Finland joined the European Union in 1995, it has sought to adopt a standardized Western military system. That meant utilizing NATO interoperable hardware and tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP). The decision has made Finland fully interoperable with alliance partners, a skill it hones with regular exercises with NATO partners.

Finland’s ties to NATO have extended to its support for Ukraine.

Since Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in 2014, Finland has provided economic, military, and non-military assistance to Ukraine.

While Finland’s decision was tough as a non-NATO member, the implications for allowing Russian aggression are real.

“There are scenarios that for us they won’t stop in Ukraine,” Seppala said of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s broader goals.

“They will continue to some other places like Georgia, some people say Finland, because we are not part of NATO, there is no Article 5,” he said. Seppala said that while a Russian attack on Finland is unlikely, retaliatory hybrid attacks are now happening and may increase.

Finland has weaned itself off energy dependence on Russia, recently activating a nuclear reactor in order to provide a vital energy source should Russia cut off exports. The Finnish government is likewise analyzing how it can completely do away with Russian oil and gas.

The Ukraine crisis has even prompted Finland to take additional integration steps with NATO that it has not before taken, utilizing new information and intelligence-sharing channels.

“You can’t get any closer to NATO not being a member,” said Seppala.

Finland passed up on earlier opportunities to join NATO when the Baltic states and former Warsaw Pact countries began to enter after the fall of the Berlin Wall.

“We believe that we had really good, credible homeland defense capabilities. We had deterrence, even without the alliance,” explained Seppala of thinking in the years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. “The world order is under a permanent and huge change of the times now.”

The modern context will prompt Finland’s political leaders to take a deep look at the nation’s security situation and ask important questions.

“What are the right relationships, alliances, and partnerships that are actually useful in the new world order?” Seppala posed. “And that’s what Finland also has to do.”