U.S. speeds up arms buildup with Gulf allies

[jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)]

US plans $4.2 bn Patriot missile sale to Kuwait

25 July 2012

AFP - The Pentagon said Wednesday it planned to sell 60 Patriot missiles to Kuwait in a deal worth an estimated $4.2 billion, as the emirate tries to bolster its defenses against the threat from Iran.

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), which is in charge of US weapon sales to foreign countries, notified the US Congress of the intended sale on July 20, the agency said in a statement on its website.

Congress has 30 days to raise any objections it may have. If nothing is said, the contract is deemed valid after that waiting period.

The deal involves the sale of 60 Patriot advanced capability (PAC-3) missiles, 20 launching stations, four radar systems and control stations, personnel training and training equipment, and spare parts, the DSCA said.

"Kuwait will use the PAC-3 missiles and equipment to improve its missile defense capability, strengthen its homeland defense, and deter regional threats," the agency said.

Earlier this year at a forum that brought together the United States and the six members of the Gulf Cooperation Council -- Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates -- US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton promoted a missile shield to protect Gulf Arab states from Tehran.

The six GCC states are all major buyers of US arms.

Kuwait already has Patriot missiles. In 1992, it bought 210 of the earlier-generation Patriots, and 25 launchers. It then bought 140 more in 2007, according to the Congressional Research Service.

http://www.france24.com/en/20120725-us-plans-42-bn-patriot-missile-sale-kuwait

[Elzenga]

Hmmmm, voorbereiding of containment strategie? De VS weet zo wel haar invloed zwaar te versterken want meer en meer landen hebben de VS nu nodig voor hun verdediging tegen een "agressief" Iran. Misschien dat een nucleair Iran zo zelfs in het voordeel van de VS kan werken?!

Ik denk dat je hier een sterk punt hebt... want laten we eerlijk zijn. De economie van de VS en zeker de overheidsbegroting verkeert in een structurele crisis. Wat niet even op de korte termijn is op te lossen. Ook is die economie nog steeds enorm energie-behoefend. Die van haar grote en opkomende concurrenten trouwens ook. En wat heeft de VS voor op hen?. Dat zijn nog steeds een groot en machtig leger en veel bondgenootschappelijke contacten en invloed uit vaak nog de Koude Oorlog tijd. En dat grote leger wordt volgens mij dus nu ingezet om de eigen belangen voor wat betreft toegang tot fossiele energiebronnen voor de komende tijd veilig te stellen. En die van concurrenten zo mogelijk te bemoeilijken of te (kunnen) beïnvloeden. Dat dit kan binnen de kaders van het aanpakken van Iran komt daarbij mooi uit. Vanuit Amerikaans oogpunt vind ik dit een zeer begrijpelijke strategie. Hoezeer hij ook tot vijandige reacties leidt en zal leiden van actoren en landen die hier bij verliezen.

[ARM-WAP]

Zolang Iran niet open is over haar nucleair programma dat iedereen in die regio daar wel een beetje met een ei zit.

Dus eigenlijk speelt Iran in 'de kaart' van de US (mochten de US daadwerkelijk hun _militaire_ invloed in die regio uitbreiden) door zo geheimzinnig te doen en niet actief meewerken met de IAEA en de inspecties die deze wil laten uitvoeren.
Het in een baan om de aarde sturen van een rat is ongetwijfeld een onderdeel van een ander 'vredelievend' programma...

Voor mij is het simpel: ondanks al het ontkennen en de mist en nevel dat het spuit werkt Iran al jaren actief aan een nucleair bewapeningsprogramma en eens komt de dag waarop het doodleuk aankondigt dat het
- én dé bom
- én de middelen (draagraket) heeft om iedereen in de regio (Israel) in een wurggreep te houden indien Iran dit nodig acht.

Dus acht ik het best logisch dat de omliggende staten bij een grote mogenheid aan de deur kloppen om hen te vragen wat ABM-defensiesystemen te plaatsen en bemannen. En in dit geval is het nu net de US. Het had mss evengoed Rusland kunnen zijn...

Dat deze eenheden ook in de buurt zullen zijn wanneer Israel  een pre-emptive strike uitvoert is mooi meegenomen. 

[VandeWiel]

Hmmmm, voorbereiding of containment strategie? De VS weet zo wel haar invloed zwaar te versterken want meer en meer landen hebben de VS nu nodig voor hun verdediging tegen een "agressief" Iran. Misschien dat een nucleair Iran zo zelfs in het voordeel van de VS kan werken?!

[Lex]

Iran Slams U.S. Missile Deployment in Gulf

TEHRAN - Parliament speaker Ali Larijani on Feb. 2 slammed plans by the U.S. to beef up defenses in the Gulf against potential Iranian missile attacks, insisting the Islamic republic is no threat to its neighbors.

"America's new puppet show for protecting and implementing security in the region is nothing but a new political trick to pave the way for its presence at others' expense," Larijani said in comments to the house carried by the state broadcaster.

"American officials do not realize that they are the problems in the region. The more equipment you bring in, the more it worries the countries where they are deployed," he added.

"Has Iran ever committed any aggression against any neighbors or the region?" he asked.

Larijani was responding to reports that the U.S. administration is placing specialized ships with missile-targeting capabilities off Iran's coast, and anti-missile systems in at least four Gulf states - Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, accused the West of seeking to weaken Gulf countries in a meeting Feb. 2 with visiting Qatari crown prince Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani.

"Westerners do not want the region to be secure or the regional countries to have friendly ties," he was quoted as saying by the state broadcaster.

"They have always tried to keep the region's countries weak. Their life depends on creating division and insecurity," he said. But "fortunately there is a common perception by Tehran and Qatar of the enemies' plots."

Iranian officials have carried out frequent war games in the Gulf and threatened to hit Western targets if Iran's nuclear sites come under attack by the United States or Israel.

Iran is locked in a standoff with the West over its controversial nuclear program, which many world powers believe is masking a weapons drive. Iran has vehemently denied this.

By AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 2 Feb 2010 05:10

[Elzenga]

The stationing of extra anti-missile defences in the Gulf is likely to be part of an American effort to reassure its nervous Gulf Arab allies that it is acting to contain whatever threat they see from Iran.

En denk ik ook een signaal naar Israël...Want met name de schepen schermen ook een deel van de eerste zone af wanneer Iran raketten zou afvuren op Israël.

(Al heb ik dit wel even gecheckt op Google Earth ...gaat hierbij met name om Koeweit en noordelijk deel Perzische Golf)

[ARM-WAP]

Gulf missile move - defensive or aggressive?

By Paul Reynolds
World affairs correspondent, BBC News website

An increase in anti-missile capabilities by the United States in the Gulf should probably be seen as more of a defensive manoeuvre against Iran than an aggressive one.

US officials have let it be known that it now has Patriot batteries in four Gulf states - Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. US anti-missile ships are also being stationed in the Gulf.

All this comes as the impasse over Iran's nuclear activities continues and amid efforts by the US and other Western countries to increase sanctions on Iran.


The stationing of extra anti-missile defences in the Gulf is likely to be part of an American effort to reassure its nervous Gulf Arab allies that it is acting to contain whatever threat they see from Iran.

That threat is regarded as increasingly coming from ballistic missiles. The increased capability, of course, also gives the US better options if there is a confrontation with Iran.

And the deployment should also be viewed in the context of a review of US ballistic missile strategy being presented by the Obama administration to Congress.

Better defences in the Gulf are part of that and so are other measures to make up for the abandonment of the system in Poland and the Czech Republic, designed to counter any longer-term threat from Iran.

A useful comparison is with the way in which the US has built up anti-missile defences for Japan and South Korea against North Korea. It has provided both countries with the ship-based Aegis system and last year Japan deployed this fully for the first time in response to North Korean missile tests.

'Strategic intent'

US strategy against Iran therefore continues to be a mixture of economic and diplomatic pressure plus military measures that do not, at present, include an intention to attack Iran.


" President Obama has effectively dropped offers to reach out and in his recent State of the Union speech spoke of 'growing consequences' if Iran did not comply with UN resolutions "

The US position on Iran was delicately summed up on 7 January by Admiral Michael Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "I believe they're on a path that has a strategic intent to develop nuclear weapons, and have been for some time.

"I think that outcome is potentially a very, very destabilising outcome. On the other hand, when asked about striking Iran, specifically, that also has a very, very destabilising outcome. "

The admiral acknowledged that the US does have plans for an attack ("Should the president call for military options, we must have them ready," he said in December) but the emphasis still is on non-military measures.

In contrast, one can note that pressure for further action against Iran is still coming from some quarters. The former British Prime Minister Tony Blair said last week that he favoured a "very tough, hard line" without saying whether this meant a military strike.

So where do we stand on any new measures?

President Obama has effectively dropped offers to reach out and in his recent State of the Union speech spoke of "growing consequences" if Iran did not comply with UN resolutions. Iran says its intentions are peaceful.

The president has concluded that Iran is not interested in the "extended hand" he held out last year. Iran seems to have finally rejected the plan to have its enriched uranium stock converted to fuel in Russia and France. Therefore the US has begun to discuss moves to impose greater sanctions on Iran.

These would aim at the financial activities of the Revolutionary Guards, it seems, though the US Congress still wants sanctions against exports of refined petroleum products to Iran. Iran's inability to make such products is one of its main weaknesses.

China and Russia are currently resisting any further measures by the Security Council and China and the US have their own diplomatic arguments at the moment (over freedom for Google in China and US arms sales to Taiwan), so at some stage the US will have to decide whether to act outside the Security Council with whatever allies (the EU mainly) it can muster.

Israel seems ready to accept that for the time being, sanctions are the course to follow.

For its part, Iran is threatening to raise the temperature again by further enriching its uranium to the level needed for fuel for its research reactor in Tehran, which produces medical isotopes.

However since Iran could not convert that uranium into the fuel rods needed, the purpose of this further enrichment will leave it open to more suspicion that it is simply developing nuclear technology.

Paul.Reynolds-INTERNET@bbc.co.uk

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/world/americas/8490929.stm

[Elzenga]

Het militair-industriële complex lacht zich een hoedje....de militaire avonturen van de Regering Bush hebben honderden miljarden aan overheidsgeld richting wapenindustrie gesluisd. De dramatische terugval na het einde van de Koude Oorlog snel vergetend zo. En de instabiliteit die beide invasies nu in de Golf-regio hebben veroorzaakt levert weer tientallen miljarden aan nieuwe orders op van de Golfstaten...Ik denk dat er voor de heren politici uit de Regering Bush stuk voor stuk erg fijne banen met prachtige salarissen beschikbaar zullen zijn bij de grote wapenfabrikanten/conglomeraten... waarmee zij hun "schamele" inkomen tijdens hun politieke periode fijn kunnen opvijzelen tot miljoenen-hoogte en er voortaan warmpjes bij zitten. Al doen andere verantwoordelijken, zoals Blair, dat gewoon via het vaak eveneens door de Golfstaten georganiseerde "spreekerscircuit". En de gewone man in zowel Westerse landen als de Golf-regio betaald zoals gebruikelijk de prijs. Gek he, dat in beide regio's radicalisten steeds meer aanhang krijgen....

[Lex]

DUBAI, UNITED ARAB EMIRATES - The Obama administration is quietly working with Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf allies to speed up arms sales and rapidly upgrade defenses for oil terminals and other key infrastructure in a bid to thwart future military attacks by Iran, according to former and current U.S. and Middle Eastern government officials.

The initiatives, including a U.S.-backed plan to triple the size of a 10,000-man protection force in Saudi Arabia, are part of a broader push that includes unprecedented coordination of air defenses and expanded joint exercises between the U.S. and Arab militaries, the officials said. All appear to be aimed at increasing pressure on Tehran.

The efforts build on commitments by the George W. Bush administration to sell warplanes and anti-missile systems to friendly Arab states to counter Iran's growing conventional arsenal. The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are leading a region-wide military buildup that has resulted in more than $25 billion in U.S. arms purchases in the past two years alone.

Middle Eastern military and intelligence officials said Gulf states are embracing the expansion as Iran reacts increasingly defiantly to international censure over its nuclear program. Gulf states fear retaliatory strikes by Iran or allied groups such as Hezbollah in the event of a preemptive strike against Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States or Israel.

For the Obama administration, the cooperation represents tangible progress against Iran at a time when the White House is struggling to build international support for stronger diplomatic measures, including tough new economic sanctions, a senior official said in an interview.

"We're developing a truly regional defensive capability, with missile systems, air defense and a hardening up of critical infrastructure," said the official, who is involved in strategic planning with Gulf states and who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "All of these have progressed significantly over the past year."

U.S. support for the buildup has been kept low-key to avoid fueling concerns in Israel and elsewhere about an accelerating conventional-arms race in the region. Iran, which has made steady advances in developing medium-range missiles, is seeking to acquire modern air-defense systems from Russia while also expanding its navy with new submarines and ships.

Gulf officials say their defensive improvements would be undertaken regardless of U.S. support, but some said they were encouraged by the supportive signals from the Obama administration, which regional leaders initially feared would be more accommodating of Iran than the Bush White House.

"It's a tough neighborhood, and we have to make sure we are protected," said a senior government official in a U.S.-allied Arab state. The official, who also spoke on the condition that his name and country not be revealed, called Iran the "No. 1 threat in the region."

Major arms buildups
The expanded cooperation with the United States includes new agreements with Saudi Arabia to help establish a facilities-protection force under the country's Ministry of Interior to harden defenses for oil facilities, ports and water desalination plants. The new force is expected to grow to 30,000 personnel and will be used to deter attacks by al-Qaeda, as well as possible future strikes by Iran or Iranian-inspired terrorist groups, according to current and former officials familiar with the initiative. Washington is providing access to technology and equipment for the defense upgrade, the officials said.

Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, are also undertaking multibillion-dollar purchases of U.S.-made defensive systems. In the past two years, Abu Dhabi has topped the list of foreign customers for U.S. arms, buying $17 billion worth of hardware, including Patriot anti-missile batteries and an advanced anti-missile system known as Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD. Three other Middle Eastern countries are considering buying the same systems.

The UAE, which recently completed a purchase of 80 American-made F-16 fighter jets, last year was invited for the first time to participate in the U.S. Air Force's "Red Flag" exercises at Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada. The small Gulf country is in the process of negotiating a purchase of Rafale fighter jets.

A senior Emirati official familiar with the military exercises said UAE leaders want to enhance "interoperability" with U.S. defensive systems, as well as high-quality weapons.

"We don't measure ourselves by what our neighbors are doing," the official said. "We're interested in sophisticated training and the best and most capable platforms" available.

The country's buildup has impressed U.S. military officials, who say the U.S.-allied Emirates have emerged as a military power in their own right. In a speech in Bahrain last year, U.S. Centcom commander Gen. David A. Petraeus said the UAE air force alone "could take out the entire Iranian air force, I believe."

Although Gulf states are generally loath to publicly antagonize Tehran, the military expansion is occurring against a backdrop of anxiety over the growing dominance of Iran's hard-liners in the wake of last year's disputed presidential election. Like Washington, Arab capitals see Iran's nuclear program as dangerous and destabilizing, even if Iranian leaders stop short of building a nuclear warhead.

In interviews in three Middle East countries, political leaders and analysts said they fear that a nuclear-capable Iran will become the dominant regional power, able to intimidate its neighbors without fear of retaliation. Nearly all the Gulf countries have sizable Shiite Muslim populations with ties to Iran, and some analysts warned that Tehran may try to use these to stir up unrest and possibly even topple pro-Western governments.

"Nuclear weapons are probably most useful to Iran as a deterrent against attack by others, but beyond that, it's all about the swagger and mystique rather than the weapons system," said Nabil Fahmy, former Egyptian ambassador to the United States. "I can't see Iran using such weapons, but they could become much more provocative."

Regional nuclear fears
The concern over Iran has partly eclipsed long-standing concerns about Israel, a military powerhouse with an undeclared nuclear arsenal that includes scores of warheads that can be delivered by aircraft, submarines or long-range ballistic missiles, some regional analysts said.

Iran's apparent progress toward nuclear-weapons capability has also heightened new fears of a regional arms race that will expand to include atomic bombs. Driving the concerns are new initiatives by several oil- and gas-rich Arab states to build nuclear reactors or power plants, ostensibly to augment domestic energy supplies. The UAE, with heavy U.S. support, recently signed deals to build its first nuclear power reactors. Among other countries taking or considering similar steps are Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Kuwait, Jordan and Yemen.

Western and Middle Eastern analysts say it is unlikely that any of those countries will openly pursue nuclear weapons, a move that would probably draw international condemnation and prompt a suspension of Western aid. The UAE has taken pains to design a nuclear energy program that it says is proliferation-proof, eliminating parts of the nuclear fuel cycle that could be exploited to obtain material for bombs.

But if Iran were to test a nuclear device, all countries in the region would reconsider their options, government officials and analysts said.
"Every country in the region will open their files and decide again what to do," said a retired Arab general who asked for anonymity so he could speak freely about the subject. "If nuclear weapons appears to be the road to becoming a world power, why shouldn't that be us?"

The Washington Post
updated 5:37 p.m. ET Jan. 30, 2010