Get Out And Don't Come Back

Get out and don’t come back.  That’s the message from China, Russia, and Iran to the US regarding the presence of our warships in the East/South China Seas, Black and Baltic Seas, and the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, respectively.  Of course, these are international waters that all countries are free to travel.  Despite that, the respective countries apparently view the waters as theirs and call any US presence destabilizing or worse.

There is a school of thought, promoted by misguided, shallow thinkers, that suggests that if we did as requested and left the regions as demanded, that all would be peace and love in the world – that it’s only the presence of the US that makes otherwise happy, peaceful, caring, and responsible countries act irrationally.  Aside from being idiots, these people seem unaware of the number and size of the areas that we would be excluded from if the peaceful countries had their way.  Also, the amount of international commerce that transits these waters is staggering.  With no US presence to ensure the safety of that shipping, piracy, be it traditional criminal piracy or government sponsored “fees” for the privilege of passage, would become rampant.

What’s disturbing about this issue is that we’re essentially complying with the demands. 

We’ve completely ceded the entire South and East China Seas with nothing more than an occasional impotent Freedom of Navigation exercise which, truth be told, only strengthens China’s claims and demands.

We’ve largely backed off any enforcement actions against Iran in the Middle East.  They’re bombing commercial vessels, seizing ships (including US naval ships!), shooting down our drones in international air space, and harassing ships and aircraft with near impunity.  The only reaction from the US has been one downing of a drone that we’re not even 100% sure was Iranian.

Russia has largely forced us out of the region and aggressively harasses any ships or aircraft we dare to send in.

Russia, Iran, and China are all closely watching our reactions to the various provocations and exclusionary demands and our lack of reaction (appeasement) only encourages additional, more aggressive actions on their parts.

North Korean Ballistic Missile Tests

North Korea continues its insane saber rattling and its stone cold sober preparations for nuclear war with more ballistic missile tests.  NKorea also brazenly stated that the tests were practice for hitting American bases, as reported by the Washington Post website.

“North Korea was practicing to strike United States military bases in Japan with its latest barrage of missiles, state media in Pyongyang reported Tuesday …” (1)

The US, meanwhile, continues its policy of world wide appeasement.

At some point, it ought to occur to US government leaders that appeasement is not working. 

• Despite our best efforts at appeasement, NKorea continues its inexorable march towards developing nuclear ballistic missiles. 

• Despite our best efforts at appeasement, China continues to ignore international law by building artificial islands and militarizing them while making illegal and outrageous territorial claims in and around the South China Sea, Philippines, and Japan.

• Despite our best efforts at appeasement, Russia continues its program of annexation and  invasion while harassing US military aircraft and ships.

• Despite our best efforts at appeasement – and bribery! - Iran continues its inexorable march towards developing nuclear ballistic missiles while harassing US ships.

Here’s a thought for the new administration.  Instead of appeasing NKorea, why not station an Aegis/BMD cruiser off NKorea and shoot down the next ballistic missile they launch.  We can call it, “practice” for shooting down ballistic missiles.

The NKorean missiles fell within the Japanese Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).  If I were Japan, I’d think that was way too close to my land and I’d want to prevent any future missile shots.  What if the next one travels a little further (whether intentionally or inadvertently – NKorea is not exactly the most technologically accomplished country in the world – they may have little idea where the missiles will land) and impacts Japanese land?

We are way past the point where any reasonable person can claim that appeasement is working.  It’s time to insist that rogue nations behave responsibly and to back up that insistence with demonstrations of resolve and, if necessary, force.

______________________________

(1)Washington Post website, “North Korea says it was practicing to hit U.S. military bases in Japan with missiles”, Anna Fifield, 6-Mar-2017,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/north-korea-says-it-was-trying-to-hit-us-military-bases-in-japan-with-missiles/2017/03/06/b375ad36-327f-4d9e-9dba-398a7cde8742_story.html?utm_term=.646875eaaaef

Where's the Escort?

We’ve discussed the highly aggressive (unsafe) intercepts performed by Russian aircraft against US ships and planes.  Yet another one has just occurred with a Russian fighter intercepting a P-8 Poseidon in an unsafe manner by passing within 10 ft of the US aircraft (1). 

Of course, there’s always a chorus of cries for more restraint and appeasement by the timid crowd.  Apparently, there’s no amount of provocation that will elicit a reaction from these people – but that’s not the point of this post.

The point is, where’s the US escort for a high value unit like the Poseidon?  This is our newest and most capable maritime patrol aircraft.  Do we really want to risk having it forced down and captured by Russia, to be stripped of all secrets as happened to the EP-3 that was forced down, seized, and stripped by the Chinese a few years ago?  Doesn’t basic common sense suggest that a high value unit like the P-8 have a protective escort readily available?

P-8 Poseidon - We're Going To Lose One

I’m not suggesting that the escort instantly fire on any Russian aircraft it sees but there can’t be anything wrong with exhibiting some aggressive intercept flying of our own on any approaching Russian aircraft. 

I’ll repeat my past call.  Let’s respond or leave.  If we’re not going to protect our own forces then let’s leave the disputed areas.  There is absolutely no point to having military forces in a region if we absolutely refuse to take action no matter the provocation.

______________________________________

(1)CBS News website, “Russian jet flies within 10 ft of US Navy aircraft”, Associated Press, 7-Sep-2016,

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-fighter-jet-flies-within-feet-us-navy-aircraft/

Mutiny?

Wow!  Read these excerpts from a Fox News website article about the recent Iranian seizure of two US boats and crews (1).

“…when the order was given to evade the Iranian forces, the helmsman refused the order.”

The helmsman "refused the order" ?????

Are you kidding me?!  That’s mutiny.

“ ‘The story here is these guys had gotten so used to Iranians doing stupid s---, having weapons pointed at them all the time, they didn’t know they were being captured until the Iranians boarded their boats,’ one defense official said describing the lack of situational awareness by the Navy crew. ‘They messed up pretty bad.’ “

Are you kidding me?!  We’ve gotten so used to being threatened that we didn’t even know we were being boarded?  This is what happens when your default force posture is appeasement.  Sure, they’re pointing presumably live weapons at you but, hey, don’t respond.  That’s idiotic.  If someone points a weapon at you, shoot them!  Even in the civilian world, that’s legal.

At the moment, these are unsubstantiated snippets so I’ll withhold final judgment pending the release of the official report in a couple days but this doesn’t look good.

A Congressman (I can’t recall who it was) who had been briefed on this incident, stated in an interview a week or so ago that we weren’t going to believe what would be in the report on this.  If these snippets are any example, he was more than right.

If these incidents are proven to be true in the official report, CNO Richardson should resign for having allowed the Navy’s readiness and discipline to fall to such a low level.  Of course, to be fair, the bulk of the blame lies with his predecessor, Adm. Greenert, but he's now untouchable.  Still, the blame always lies with the Captain and the Captain of the Navy is CNO Richardson.  He's got to go.

I can’t wait for this report to come out.

__________________________

(1)foxnews.com, “Navy commodore to be relieved of command over Iran's capture of his sailors”, Lucas Tomlinson, June 24, 2016,

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/06/24/navy-commodore-to-be-relieved-command-over-irans-capture-his-sailors.html

Russia To Militarize Kuril Islands

Well, it was bound to happen.  After observing the lack of response by the US to China’s militarization of the disputed first island chain, Russia has announced that it intends to militarize the disputed Kuril Island chain.

“Russia will deploy a range of coastal missile systems on the far-eastern Kuril islands, claimed by Japan, as part of its military build-up in the region, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said Friday.”

"The planned rearmament of contingents and military bases on Kuril islands is under way. Already this year they will get Bal and Bastion coastal missile systems as well as new-generation Eleron-3 unmanned aerial vehicles," Shoigu said during a ministry meeting.” (1)

The Kuril Island chain forms an arc of islands extending 800 miles and connecting northern Japan to the Russian Kamchatka Peninsula.  The island chain bounds the Sea of Okhotsk.

Kuril Island Chain

As with the East and South China Seas and the first island chain, the Kuril Islands form a natural extended defensive buffer ring around much of the eastern coast of Russia.  Militarizing the islands will create a greatly extended anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) zone and will complicate and threaten US air and naval operations in the northern Pacific and Alaskan area.

No one outside of high level Russian leaders can say for sure but it seems obvious that the lack of response from the US toward China’s militarization of the first island chain provided the reassurance for Russia that its military moves would not be challenged.  This is what happens when you establish a policy of appeasement. 

Our appeasement of China and Russia is going to make future military clashes much more difficult for us.  We’re losing future battles before they’re even fought.

__________________

(1)Defense News Website, “Russia To Deploy Missile Systems on Kuril Islands, Defense Minister Says”, Agence France-Presse, March 25, 2016,

http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/international/asia-pacific/2016/03/25/russia-japan-kuril-islands/82261548/

Russian Simulated Attacks on US Warship

Appeasement encourages more aggression.  History has demonstrated that repeatedly.  The latest proof is this incident involving Russian aircraft and a US ship (1).

“In one of the most aggressive actions in recent memory, Russian warplanes conducted “simulated attacks” on the a U.S. Navy vessel in the Baltic Sea on Tuesday, repeatedly flying within 30 feet of the ship, according to a defense official.

Sailors aboard the destroyer Donald Cook said the aircraft flew low enough to create wake in the sea waters surrounding the ship, and the ship’s commanding officer said the incident was “unsafe and unprofessional,” the defense official said.

“This was more aggressive than anything we’ve seen in some time,” according to the defense official …”

There may also be a legal aspect to this.

“The nature of the overflight as a “simulated attack” may violate a 1973 treaty between the U.S. and Russia that specifically prohibits this type of maneuver, the defense official said.”

For you Russian apologists out there, this was not an isolated incident, misunderstanding, or act of a rogue pilot.

“The maneuver was one of several aggressive moves by Russian aircraft on Monday and Tuesday.”

Russian Aircraft Overflying USS Cook - Now That's Close!

Russia has observed our utter lack of response to Chinese provocations and Russia’s own seizure of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine and concluded, rightly, that we aren’t going to respond.  There are a couple of logical conclusions to draw from this.

1. Our lack of response will only encourage further and escalating acts by Russia (and other countries).  It is only a matter of time until Russia demands that we vacate the Baltic Sea as a Russian “territory”.  Don’t believe it?  China has seized the South China Sea and all but formally declared it to be sovereign Chinese territory, warning the US to stay out of the area.  Why would Russia hesitate to do less?  Closure of the Baltic Sea to US naval forces would be a logical precursor to the annexation of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia.

2. Our forces are being needlessly wasted in the Baltic Sea.  If we won’t stand up to Russian aggression, why have ships there?  What purpose do they serve?  We may as well bring them back to the US and save wear and tear on the ships and crew as well as saving money on operating costs.

On the other hand, we could respond to flagrant Russian aggression with our own aggression.  An “accidental” shootdown of a Russian aircraft by a Phalanx or RAM undergoing “maintenance” would go a long way to discouraging future Russian acts of aggression.  Accidents happen.  That’s why aircraft shouldn’t conduct passes unsafely close to warships.

I can already hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth among the appeasement fans.  We can’t upset Russia.  They won’t like us.  They’ll get mad at us.  They have nuclear weapons.  Hey, Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft and nothing happened except that the Russian’s probably steered clear of that area from then on.  Amazing how that works.

Seriously, if we aren’t going to use our Navy then bring them home.

I hope the Russians are prepared for a sternly worded note of protest from the US with, possibly, a hint of disapproval.  I wouldn't want to be in Putin's shoes when he gets our note!

_________________

(1)Defense News website, “Russian attack aircraft just flew within 30 feet of a U.S. Navy ship”, Andrew Tilghman, 13-Apr-2016,

http://www.defensenews.com/story/military/2016/04/13/russian-su-24-attack-aircraft-us-navy-destroyer-donald-cook-baltic-sea/82979184/

Appeasement - Follow Up

By now, I'm sure you've read about the Chinese task force passing through United States territorial waters (inside the 12 mile limit) near Alaska in an exercise referred to as "innocent passage".  This procedure allows ships to pass through another country's territorial waters under certain conditions.  ComNavOps has no problem, per se, with the Chinese exercising their rights.  There are, however, a few noteworthy aspects to this incident.

First, the timing was such that the incident occurred as President Obama was conducting a trip to Alaska.  The timing and the implicit message could not be more obvious.  However, we'll leave the political aspects and move on.

The maneuver cannot be interpreted as anything but provocative.  The Chinese ships were not in a position where they had no choice but to take that particular path.  The choice was deliberate.  This should speak volumes to us about our current policy of appeasement.  The more we back off, accommodate, and make peaceful gestures and concessions, the more aggressive the Chinese behave.  That's not surprising, really.  History tells us with 100% certainty that appeasement only encourages further aggression.

Remember the incident in Dec 2013 when the Aegis cruiser Cowpens was harassed and chased off from observing a Chinese carrier in international waters in the South China Sea?  We meekly left the area after being harassed and warned off.  We left international waters!  Despite this appeasement, China engages in deliberately provocative maneuvers in US territorial waters.  Do you see the blatant failure of appeasement?  And this is just one example.

So, the Chinese pattern of response to our appeasement is further provocation and aggression.  So much for appeasement.

What we should have done is observe the Chinese innocent passage by having our ships literally bump the Chinese the entire passage and having a non-stop succession of aircraft conduct low level supersonic observation passes over the Chinese ships throughout the entire passage.  If they wanted to send messages, we should have answered with our own.

I can already hear the sniveling and whining.  "We can't risk escalation".  Well, I've got news for you if you can stop wetting yourself long enough to hear it - the Chinese are escalating the situation on a daily basis.  We need to either get in the fight or back completely out of the Pacific and learn to speak Mandarin while we wait for the Chinese to reach San Francisco.