The planned 7.5 percent boost in defense spending in 2010 follows at least 20 years of double-digit increases in the budget for the People’s Liberation Army — the world’s largest standing military with more than 2.3 million members.

Rapid military modernization and the acquisition of cutting-edge jet fighters, warships and submarines have aroused suspicions in Washington, Tokyo, New Delhi and elsewhere over China’s intentions, further fueled by Beijing’s growing diplomatic assertiveness and booming economic might.

The increase will be used to enhance China’s ability “to meet various threats,” said Li Zhaoxing, spokesman for China’s parliament, the National People’s Congress, at a news conference held on the eve of the opening of its annual legislative session.

“China is committed to peaceful development and a military posture that is defensive in nature,” Li said.

He said this year’s defense budget of 532.11 billion yuan ($77.9 billion) remained relatively low, particularly in relation to the country’s vast territory and population. Li said Chinese defense spending has accounted for about 1.4 percent of gross domestic product in recent years, as opposed to more than 4 percent in the United States and more than 2 percent in Britain, France and Russia.

The increase over actual military spending in 2009 was 37.12 billion yuan, Li said. Defense expenditures account for 6.3 percent of China’s total budget, a decline from previous years, he said.

Officials say about one-third of China’s spending goes to salaries and improving living conditions for soldiers, with the rest split between replacing equipment and military research and development.

However, many overseas analysts believe the official figure accounts for only a part of actual military spending, with estimates on the total amount ranging up to twice or more what Beijing claims.

Figures provided by China’s Cabinet show the country’s last single-digit percentage in defense spending was in the 1980s.

The smaller rise in spending is due in part to the hit China’s economy, especially the crucial export sector, has taken from the global financial crisis, prompting the government to rein in some expenditures, said Ni Lexiong, a defense analyst at Shanghai University of Political Science and Law.

Meanwhile, the leadership has realized that large increases are generating concern and suspicion among China’s neighbors, potentially sparking an arms race, he said.

“The decline shows that China does not want to be seen as an aggressive military power,” Ni said.

Thursday’s announcement follows repeated protests recently by Beijing over the U.S. sale of weaponry to Taiwan. Those sales are driven by threats from China to use force to bring the island under its control, backed up by an estimated 1,300 Chinese ballistic missiles positioned along the Taiwan Strait.

Communist-ruled China split with Taiwan amid civil war in 1949 and continues to regard the self-governing democracy as part of its territory. Beijing has warned of a disruption in ties with Washington if the sale goes ahead, but has not said what specific actions it would take.

Li, the congress spokesman, accused some foreign countries of backing Taiwan to thwart China, calling that unacceptable interference in China’s internal affairs.

Washington’s announcement in January that it intended to sell Taiwan $6.4 billion in helicopters, air defense missiles and other military hardware was especially unwelcome because it came amid a warming trend in Beijing’s relations with the island, he said.

Taiwan relations are less a factor in Beijing’s defense spending than economic stress and worries about appearing overly aggressive, said defense scholar Wang Kun-yi of Taipei’s Tamkung University.

“China’s defense budget is not specifically linked to cross-strait developments, but rather it is more related to the country’s global positioning,” Wang said.

Defense spending is among budget items to be approved at the end of the National People’s Congress’ session, which begins Friday and runs through March 14.

This year’s session is expected to see a shift in spending priorities toward affordable housing, education, health care and other social programs.

Li said the full assembly this year would amend a law on how deputies are selected, correcting a disparity that gave urban Chinese greater representation than their more numerous rural neighbors.

The Obama Administration’s military budget proposals for next year are out, and I think we can all breathe a collective sigh of relief.

The aerospace and defense industry has spent months fretting about President Obama’s 2011 defense budget — more out of uncertainty than fear. It is this proposed budget, far more than the one last year, that gives us our first clear indication of how the Obama Administration plans to treat defense spending, and the verdict is, better than we thought.

The Administration’s 2010 DOD budget request for the U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) last year essentially was George W. Bush’s last defense budget. It wasn’t until the 2011 budget proposal was released earlier this month that we see clearly how Obama wants to proceed with defense spending. The numbers speak for themselves.

The overall DOD budget is $708 billion, which consists of $549 billion in the discretionary defense budget, and $159 billion to support continuing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The discretionary DOD budget of $549 billion — which includes proposals for military personnel, military construction, and family housing, in addition to military procurement, research and development, and operations and maintenance — is an increase of $18 billion over the $531 billion enacted for 2010. This is an increase of 3.4 percent, or 1.8 percent real growth after adjusting for inflation, DOD officials say.

Those top-line budget numbers, fail to convey the real story for the aerospace and defense electronics industry. To do this requires us to look closely at DOD budget for procurement, as well as the budget for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), because these budgets largely deal with current and future military technologies.

The 2011 DOD procurement budget asks Congress for $137.48 billion, which is up only slightly — 1.05 percent — from current-year procurement spending of $136.06 billion, yet the trend is clearly going in the right direction — particularly in light of concerns that the Obama Administration was looking to cut defense spending.

RDT&E is another story. The proposed military research budget for next year is $76.77 billion, which is down 5.13 percent from current-year spending of $80.92 billion, but was not as drastic a cut as it could be.

Now take a look at the combined procurement and RDT&E budget lines for military communications, electronics, telecommunications, and intelligence (CET&I) technologies. Next year’s CET&I proposed budget is for $17.45 billion, which is an increase of 3.2 percent from this year’s CET&I congressionally enacted spending levels of $17.45 billion.

All this is good news for the military electronics and electro-optics industries. It means we can be on solid ground as we plan for the future. Barring unforeseen circumstances, I don’t think we are going to see substantial defense spending cuts over at least the next several years; there is simply not the political will to do so.

President Obama’s agenda seems to revolve around domestic programs; for defense spending it’s steady as she goes — at least for now. If the Administration were intent on cutting defense spending, this 2011 budget was the one where this was most likely to happen, especially with a Democrat-controlled Congress that had appeared compliant to the Administration’s wishes.

Now we’re into an election year, and no one in the Administration or on Capitol Hill wants to rock the boat on defense spending and preparedness as we move closer to the congressional mid-term elections next November.

Again, barring unforeseen circumstances, we are not likely to see substantial increases in defense spending over the next several years, yet we are not likely to see major cuts, either.

So for all of you out there who have been in mental, political, and financial holding patterns, it’s time to break out and start moving forward. I don’t see any end in sight in the global war on terror — ooops, sorry … the “overseas contingency operations” — which means we’ll see a continuing solid market for advanced sensors, battlefield networking, optics and fire control, and many other new technologies that will be involved in counter-terror and counter-insurgency operations.

Everyone involved in the military technology business can get to sleep tonight, resting assured, that the Department of Defense is still open for business.

The Heron TP drones have a wingspan of 86 feet (26 meters), making them the size of Boeing 737 passenger jets and the largest unmanned aircraft in Israel’s military. The planes can fly at least 20 consecutive hours and are primarily used for surveillance and carrying diverse payloads.

At the fleet’s inauguration ceremony at a sprawling air base in central Israel, the drone dwarfed an F-15 fighter jet parked beside it. The unmanned plane resembles its predecessor, the Heron, but can fly higher, reaching an altitude of more than 40,000 feet (12,000 meters), and remain in the air longer.

“With the inauguration of the Heron TP, we are realizing the air force’s dream,” said Brig. Gen. Amikam Norkin, commander of the base that will operate the drones. “The Heron TP is a technological and operational breakthrough.”

The commander of Israel’s air force, Maj. Gen. Ido Nehushtan, said the aircraft “has the potential to be able to conduct new missions down the line as they become relevant.”

Israel’s military refused to say how large the new fleet is or whether the planes were designed for use against Iran, but stressed it was versatile and could adapt to new missions. The plane’s maker, state-owned Israel Aerospace Industries, has said it is capable of reaching the Persian Gulf, which would put Iran within its range.

Israeli defense officials said the Heron TP could be a useful tool against Iran. It could provide surveillance, jam enemy communications and connect ground control and manned air force planes.

The officials requested anonymity because they were discussing sensitive military technology.

Israel considers Iran a strategic threat because of its nuclear program, long-range missiles and repeated references by its leaders to the Jewish state’s destruction.

Israel has hinted at the possibility of a military strike against Iran if world pressure does not halt Tehran’s nuclear program. Israel and the U.S. believe Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons; Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes.

In past conflicts, various types and sizes of unmanned planes have been used in missions like long-range surveillance and attacking enemy targets with guided missiles in conflicts like Iraq and Afghanistan, where anti-aircraft systems are rudimentary.

They have proven much less successful in conflicts where the opponents possessed better anti-aircraft weapons.

During NATO’s aerial onslaught against Serbia in 1999, for example, Serbian quickly forces shot down 42 U.S. drones, drastically reducing the effectiveness of the bombing campaign.

“We are aware of the dangers such an aircraft can meet in the battlefield, and we do whatever we can to protect it,” said air force Lt. Col. Eyal.

Eyal, whose last name was not disclosed in line with military guidelines, would not comment on how the plane could protect itself from anti-aircraft systems.

Israeli defense analyst Shlomo Brom, a retired general and security expert at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies, called the new drone a breakthrough.

“Its staying power and the height it can reach means it is able to cover ground continuously and it is able to cover large territory,” he said.

Israel’s military was the first to make widespread use of drones in its 1982 invasion of Lebanon, according to Mark Daly, an expert on unmanned aircraft at Jane’s defense publications in London.

Israeli companies are considered world leaders in drone technology and now export unmanned aircraft to a number of armies, including U.S.-led forces that have used them in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Heron TP has been in development for about a decade, but the aircraft first saw action during Israel’s offensive against Hamas militants in the Gaza Strip just over a year ago.

Drones were seen as crucial to the Gaza onslaught by giving soldiers eyes in the air, keeping watch over rooftops and alleyways in congested urban areas — notifying troops of threats or obstacles in their path.

Palestinian witnesses have long claimed that Israeli drones fire missiles in Gaza, both before and during the Israeli offensive. Israel has never confirmed that its unmanned aircraft are capable of firing missiles.

The military says the huge new drone will give an added element to Israel’s ability to control its borders.

These “zombie” computers are often grouped into “botnets,” or armies of infected computers that can be used to send spam e-mail or attack Web sites, according to McAfee, a Silicon Valley security firm. The company, which said it collects information about Internet-based threats that target more than 100 million computers in 120 countries, said that in the last three months of 2009, about 1,095,000 computers in China and 1,057,000 in the United States were infected.

Those numbers are in addition to 10 million or so previously infected computers in each country, McAfee said.

The prevalence of botnets is a sign of how vulnerable computer networks are to infiltration, a subject of increasing international debate as companies and governments seek to defend their computer systems from intruders.

Last month, Google announced that its networks had been penetrated by attacks originating in China. The Chinese government denied any involvement, saying that hacking in is against the law. There was no indication that the attack involved botnets, experts said.

In a Jan. 21 speech about Internet freedom, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton advanced the notion of cyberspace as a “global networked commons” and urged the creation of “norms of behavior” among states. Echoing a key principle behind NATO, she said: “An attack on one nation’s networks can be an attack on all.”

She declared that “countries or individuals that engage in cyberattacks should face consequences and international condemnation.”

Some experts have said that Clinton’s call for accountability and norms is complicated by the fact that the United States has so many infected computers. “The government could crack down on botnets, but doing so would raise the cost of software or Internet access and would be controversial,” Jack Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School, wrote in a recent opinion piece in The Washington Post. “So it has not acted, and the number of dangerous botnet attacks from America grows.”

Indeed, Stewart A. Baker, a cyber expert and former assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security, said he would like to see a few leading nations develop “effective national norms aimed at eliminating zombie computers.” Companies could be encouraged or required to comply, he said.

One Internet service provider has begun a voluntary service to notify customers when their computers have been infected by bots, viruses and other online threats. Philadelphia-based Comcast, which has 15 million non-commercial customers, began the program last fall. Such initiatives, some experts said, could start to clear out the “noise” in the networks and could help in identifying higher-order threats that could compromise critical computer systems.

One reason computers in China are so vulnerable to botnets may be that software piracy is common and computer users often have not updated the patches on their machines, said George Kurtz, McAfee’s worldwide chief technology officer.

In fact, the number of zombie computers in a country says more about the vulnerability of the computers than about who infected them, Baker said. A nation that might want to use botnets as part of an attack probably would want to have its own computers bot-free and commandeer computers in other countries, he said.

China has steadfastly denied that it supports or engages in hacking and that it penetrates U.S. firms’ computers to steal technology and trade secrets to help state companies — whether by bots or any other tool.

Such “remarks are groundless,” Peng Bo, an official with the Internet bureau under the Information Office, said in remarks to the New China News Agency. “In fact, China is the country worst hit by worldwide hackers.”

Experts say that the United States, which is highly networked and dependent on the Internet for commerce and the running of industry, is the most vulnerable of all countries to cyberattack.

At the same time, the United States is considered the most worrisome potential aggressor, according to McAfee, which in a separate recent survey of 600 technology and security executives of firms around the world found that 36 percent feared the United States and 33 percent feared China as potentially attacking their industries. Russia ran a distant third, at 12 percent.

The result “might simply be a reflection of the raw capabilities and frankly the raw size of U.S. intelligence agencies,” retired Gen. Michael V. Hayden, former director of the CIA and of the National Security Agency, said in the report, which was produced in conjunction with the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The United States also has been engaged in a protracted debate about how to organize its attack and defense capabilities, which may have created an “echo chamber” for concerns about such abilities, the report noted.

That report, issued last month, also found that 59 percent of the executives surveyed said they believed that representatives of foreign governments had already been involved in denial-of-service attacks (the disabling of a Web site by bombarding it with requests for access) and network intrusions to control or steal data from “critical infrastructure” industries in their countries.

A laser weapon mounted on a Boeing jumbo jet tracked the missile as it accelerated over the ocean off the Point Mugu Naval Warfare Center Thursday night, then fired an energy beam that heated the missile until it cracked and broke up, according to statements from the Air Force and two aerospace companies involved in the program.

The test is a boost for a program that has had billions in cost overruns and saw its budget sharply cut last year by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who called the concept “fatally flawed” and destined if for minimal research-and-development.

While the success of the test is a technological triumph, it won’t save the airborne laser program from being placed on life-support, a defense analyst said.

“The program results are, unfortunately, two years behind the secretary’s decision to cancel the program,” said Jim McAleese of Mcaleese and Associates, a lawyer and defense consultant in Virginia who is not affiliated with the project.

The laser program was designed to kill missiles at short range. The 2011 budget for the Missile Defense Agency concentrates instead on two ship-based missiles – the Aegis and the SM-3 – that are more useful for regional conflicts involving, say, Iran or North Korea, Mcaleese said.

“As a practical matter, absent something extraordinary, the program has already receded backwards into a technology incubator as opposed to proceeding into production and fielding,” he said.

During Thursday’s test, the so-called Airborne Laser Testbed was flown on a modified Boeing 747-400F that took off from Edwards Air Force Base in the Mojave Desert, Boeing said.

The system used two low-energy lasers to target the missile as it was boosting into the sky from a sea platform, then fired a megawatt-class Chemical Oxygen Iodine Laser, or COIL, according to the Air Force and the Missile Defense Agency.

“While ballistic missiles like the one ALTB destroyed move at speeds of about 4,000 miles per hour, they are no match for a superheated, high-energy laser beam racing towards it at 670 million mph,” Northrop Grumman Corp. said in a statement. “The basketball-sized beam was focused on the foreign military asset, as the missile is called officially, for only a few seconds before a stress fracture developed, causing the target to catastrophically split into multiple pieces.”

“This experiment marks the first time a laser weapon has engaged and destroyed an in-flight ballistic missile, and the first time that any system has accomplished it in the missile’s boost phase of flight,” Boeing Co. said in a statement. “ALTB has the highest-energy laser ever fired from an aircraft, and is the most powerful mobile laser device in the world.”

However, the Air Force said the weapon destroyed a solid-fuel target missile in flight on Feb. 3, although the statement did not provide details. It said the same kind of solid-fuel missile was hit by the laser in a second test Thursday night at Point Mugu but the beam shut off before it could destroy the rocket, the Air Force said.

Much of the research on the program was done in Southern California, which would have benefited economically had the program gone operational.

The airborne laser program began in 1996 and is one in a series of missile defense programs that originated in President Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983 – the much-maligned “Star Wars” missile shoot-down effort that was criticized as impractical, expensive and overreaching.

The airborne laser program itself was years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget when the defense secretary decided to cancel money for a second aircraft and opted to shunt the existing weapon into research and development.

“This was supposed to put high-powered lasers on a fleet of 747s,” Gates said in a speech last year. “After more than a decade of research and development, we have yet to achieve a laser with enough power to knock down a missile in boost phase more than 50 miles from the launch pad – thus requiring these huge planes to loiter deep in enemy air space to have a feasible shot at a direct hit.”

Gates said the program would have needed 10 to 20 operational aircraft at around $1.5 billion each.

Head east from Carthage on Mississippi 16 toward Philadelphia and after a few miles a sign says youre in Edinburg. Its a good thing the signs there, because theres no other way to tell.

On June 15, 1919, Van T. Barfoot was born in Edinburg. Probably didnt make much news.

Twenty-five years later, on May 23, 1944, near Carano, Italy, Van T. Barfoot, who had enlisted in the Army in 1940, set out to flank German machine gun positions from which fire was coming down on his fellow soldiers. He advanced through a minefield, took out three enemy machine gun ositions and returned with 17 prisoners of war.

If that wasnt enough for a days work, he later took on and destroyed three German tanks sent to retake the machine gun positions.

That probably didnt make much news either, given the scope of the war, but it did earn Van T. Barfoot, who retired as a colonel after also serving in Korea and Vietnam, a Congressional Medal of
Honor.

What did make news last week was a neighborhood associations quibble with how the 90-year-old veteran chose to fly the American flag outside his suburban Virginia home. Seems the rules said a
flag could be flown on a house-mounted bracket, but, for decorum, items such as Barfoots 21-foot flagpole were unsuitable.

He had been denied a permit for the pole, erected it anyway and was facing court action if he didnt take it down. Since the story made national TV, the neighborhood association has rethought its position and agreed to indulge this old hero who dwells among them.

In the time I have left I plan to continue to fly the American flag without interference, Barfoot told The Associated Press.

As well he should.

And if any of his neighbors still takes a notion to contest him, they might want to read his Medal of Honor citation. It indicates hes not real good at backing down.

Van T. Barfoots Medal of Honor citation:

This 1944 Medal of Honor citation, listed with the National Medal of Honor Society, is for Second Lieutenant Van T. Barfoot, 157th Infantry, 45th Infantry:

For conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity at the risk of life above and beyond the call of duty on 23 May 1944, near Carano, Italy. With his platoon heavily engaged during an assault against forces well entrenched on commanding ground, 2d Lt. Barfoot moved off alone upon the enemy left flank. He crawled to the proximity of 1 machinegun nest and made a direct hit on it with a hand grenade, killing 2 and wounding 3 Germans.

He continued along the German defense line to another machinegun emplacement, and with his
tommygun killed 2 and captured 3 soldiers. Members of another enemy machinegun crew then abandoned their position and gave themselves up to Sgt. Barfoot.

Leaving the prisoners for his support squad to pick up, he proceeded to mop up positions in the immediate area, capturing more prisoners and bringing his total count to 17. Later that day, after he had reorganized his men and consolidated the newly captured ground, the enemy launched a fierce armored counterattack directly at his platoon positions. Securing a bazooka, Sgt. Barfoot took up an exposed position directly in front of 3 advancing Mark VI tanks.

From a distance of 75 yards his first shot destroyed the track of the leading tank, effectively disabling it, while the other 2 changed direction toward the flank. As the crew of the disabled tank dismounted, Sgt. Barfoot killed 3 of them with his tommygun. He continued onward into enemy terrain and destroyed a recently abandoned German fieldpiece with a demolition charge placed in the breech. While returning to his platoon position, Sgt. Barfoot, though greatly fatigued by his
Herculean efforts, assisted 2 of his seriously wounded men 1,700 yards to a position of safety. Sgt. Barfoots extraordinary heroism, demonstration of magnificent valor, and aggressive determination in the face of point blank fire are a perpetual inspiration to his fellow soldiers.

Rules for Stepping up and intervening:

Rules for the Non-Military to Step up and intervene:

Make sure you read #13

Dear Civilians, ‘We know that the current state of affairs in our great nation has many civilians up in arms and excited to join the military.

For those of you who can’t join, you can still lend a hand. Here are a few of the areas where we would like your assistance:

1. The next time you see any adults talking (or wearing a hat) during the playing of the National
Anthem – Step up and intervene.

2.. When you witness, firsthand, someone burning the American Flag in protest – Step up and intervene.

3. Regardless of the rank they held while they served, pay the highest amount of respect to all veterans. If you see anyone doing otherwise, quietly pull them aside and explain how these
veterans fought for the very freedom they bask in every second. Enlighten them on the many sacrifices these veterans made to make this Nation great.

4. If you were never in the military, DO NOT pretend that you were. Wearing battle dress uniforms (BDUs) or Jungle Fatigues, telling others that you used to be ‘Special Forces’.

Collecting GI Joe memorabilia, might have been okay when you were seven years old, now, it will only make you look stupid.

5. Next time you come across an *Air Force* member, do not ask them, ‘Do you fly a jet?’ Not everyonein the Air Force is a pilot. (children are exempt).

6. If you witness someone calling the *US Coast Guard* ‘non-military’, inform them of their mistaken.

7. Next time Old Glory (the US flag) prances by during a parade, get on your damn feet and pay homage to her by placing your hand over your heart. Quietly thank the military member or veteran.

9. ‘Your mama wears combat boots’ never made sense to me – stop saying it! If she did, she would most likely be a vet.

10. ‘Flyboy’ (*Air Force*), ‘Jarhead’ (*Marines*), ‘Grunt’ (*Army*), ‘Squid’ (*Navy*), ‘Puddle Jumpers’ (*Coast Guard*), etc., are terms of endearment we use describing each other. Unless you are a service member or vet, you have not earned the right to use them.

11. Last, but not least, whether or not you become a member of the military, support our troops and their families. Every Thanksgiving and religious holiday that you enjoy with family and friends,
please remember that there are literally thousands of soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen far from home wishing they could be with their families. Thank God for our military and the sacrifices they make every day. Without them, our Country would get it’s ass kicked.

12. ‘It’s the Veteran, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of the press.’

‘It’s the Veteran, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech.’

‘It’s the Veteran, not the community organizer, who gives us the freedom to demonstrate.’

‘It’s the Military who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who allows the protester to burn the flag.’

AND ONE MORE:

13. If you ever see anyone singing the national anthem in Spanish – Step up and intervene..

China’s growing C4ISR capabilities were demonstrated in March by its coordinated two-fleet operation to intercept two U.S. Navy ocean survey vessels. Chinese ships found and harassed the USNS Victorious, operating in the Yellow Sea, and USNS Impeccable, which was about 75 mi. south of Hainan Island. The fallout was diplomatic, as Washington and Beijing clashed over interpretations of the Law of the Sea Treaty, which Beijing contends gives it rights to deny access to military survey missions. This incident, though, was reminiscent in timing and scope to the April 2001 clash that saw China “capture” a U.S. Navy EP-3 electronic intelligence aircraft off Hainan.

China’s aggressive challenge of Japanese claims in the East China Sea, plus Washington’s refusal to cease its survey missions could be flashpoints. In February, a provincial Communist Party newspaper contained a threat to sink U.S. survey ships.
In this second of three articles on China’s growing regional power, DTI examines the country’s efforts to improve its ability to target and destroy threats.

Since the early 1990s, Chinese military scholars have been warning of the need for China to prepare to defend against, and if necessary, conduct military operations in space. In late 2006 reports emerged of China’s use of high-power ground-based lasers to “dazzle” U.S. surveillance satellites. On Feb. 11, 2007, China launched the first successful intercept by its SC-19 direct-ascent antisatellite (ASAT) system, derived from its KT-1 solid-fuel space-launch vehicle, with an interceptor stage whose development was likely aided by China’s micro-satellite programs. A target FY-2 weather satellite was probably illuminated by large phased-array radar developed for tracking Shenzhou manned space capsules.

A far less-noted potential co-orbital ASAT demonstration occurred on Sept. 27, 2008, when the Shenzhou-7 manned spacecraft, which had just launched a BX-1 nanosatellite, passed within 45 km. (28 mi.) of the International Space Station. Following the U.S. Navy’s shootdown of an errant satellite on Feb. 21, 2008, and a Mar. 5, 2008, announcement that Russia would resume ASAT development, it is likely that China will continue ASAT testing.

China’s direct-ascent ASAT also proves that it is capable of developing a long-range antiballistic missile (ABM) system, a U.S. pursuit that China has opposed. China had an ABM program from 1963-80 that produced a short-range interceptor prototype and long-range radar. Chinese sources told DTI at the recent IDEX expo in Abu Dhabi (see p. 16) that they have tested the new FD-2000 surface-to-air missile (SAM) in an antitactical ballistic missile (ATBM) mode. Developed with help from Russia’s Almaz-Antey Co., the FD-2000 also draws from the earlier passive-guided FT-2000 SAM, which reportedly benefited from U.S. Patriot SAM technology. These indigenous SAMs are entering PLA service, and will complement about 1,000 Almaz-Antey S-300/PMU-1/PMU-2 SAMs purchased since the early 1990s, giving the PLA air force the most formidable air-defense network in Asia. The PLA has also developed short-range SAM systems—including man-portable air-defense systems—for tracked vehicles and trucks. Among these is the TY-90 Yitian for trucks and armored personnel carriers that was disclosed in 2005, but displayed for the first time at IDEX this year.

Increasing precision is also the hallmark of new PLA surface-to-surface missiles and air-launched weapons. New Chinese nuclear ballistic missile warheads feature smaller sharp-tip warheads, signifying higher precision. One warhead configuration for the 12,000-km.-range DF-31A ICBM places at least one warhead on a delivery bus that is apparently capable of radical maneuvering to evade ABM defenses.

Medium- and short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) are also being upgraded for greater precision. The U.S. and Japanese navies have long been concerned with the PLA program to create an antiship ballistic missile, by placing a maneuverable terminally guided warhead on the 2,400-km.-range DF-21, and likely, on the 600-km. DF-15. Asian military sources are also concerned that a new 3,000-km. version of the DF-21 may have multiple terminally guided warheads.

An early 2009 Taiwanese estimate places the DF 15, DF-11 Mod2 and new land-attack cruise missiles (LACMs) of the second artillery missile force targeting Taiwan at more than 1,500, with newer versions having navigation satellite (navsat) guidance. In 2007 a Chinese source told DTI that the PLA will also be using two new shorter-range SRBMs, the truck-mounted 250-km. B-611M and 150-km. air-transportable P-12. Both are maneuverable, navsat-guided weapons with modular warheads. The PLA is also developing longer-range artillery rocket-based SRBMs, like the 200-km. navsat-guided WS-3. Some Chinese sources indicate that an antiradar or passive-guided 300-km. version of the WS series is possible.

Asian sources say the PLA has developed two families of strategic-range LACMs: the DH-10, which equips new units of the Second Artillery, and YJ-62/C-602, which equips PLA navy destroyers and land-based antiship missile units, and is to be developed into an air-launched version for the PLA air force. The air force is expected to equip a new version of the 1950s-era Soviet Tupolev Tu-16 Badger bomber, the Xian H-6K, with the weapon. The H-6Ks modified with more powerful engines, now have a potential 3,000-km. radius—enough to reach Guam. Rumors have long surrounded a potential long-range bomber program at Xian Aircraft Co., and a new stealthy version of Xian’s JH-7A fighter bomber is also in development.

Tactical combat aircraft in the PLA air force and navy are receiving new Russian and indigenously designed air-to-air and ground-attack weapons. The air force’s first Sukhoi Su-27SK fighters had the helmet-sighted Vympel R-73 missile a decade before the Raytheon AIM-9X entered U.S. service. The BVR self-guided Vympel R-77 followed the Su-30MKK into PLA service early this decade. But new Chengdu Aircraft Corp. J-10 and Shenyang Aircraft Corp. J-11B multirole fighters will carry air-to-air missiles designed by Luoyang Opto-Electric Co. (LOEC), which include the self-guided PL-12, thought to have a range approaching 100 km. in lofted delivery. Chinese sources also indicate LOEC is developing a high off-boresight air-to-air missile (AAM) similar to the South African Denel A-Darter, and a long-range ramjet-powered AAM.

Russian Su-30s in PLA service have been equipped with several guided munitions, including the Zvezda Kh-31 antiradar and antiship ramjet missile, Zvezda Kh-59 interdiction missile and optical image-correlation-guided KAB series bombs. At the 2005 Moscow air show, a Russian source disclosed that Russia had assisted China’s development of electro-optical targeting pods, which have been photographed on J-10, JH-7A and some Hongdu Q-5 fighter-bombers. These will help guide two new families of laser- and navsat-guided bombs developed by LOEC and China Aerospace Science and Technology Corp. (CASC). The latter’s FT family includes the 500-kg. (1,100-lb.) FT-1 navsat-guided bomb, the FT-2, which adds range-extending wings, the 250-kg. FT-3 and the 100-kg. FT-5, which is reportedly comparable with Boeing’s Small Diameter Bomb. At last November’s Zhuhai air show, LOEC revealed a dual-optical navsat-guided bomb. CASC’s bombs can be expected to follow suit.

Precision is being packed into smaller munitions like the new 45-kg. AR-1, a laser-guided missile designed for the CH-3 unmanned combat air vehicle (UCAV), similar in capability to the U.S. Predator-1. Guizhou Aircraft Co. has likely developed a larger turbofan UCAV comparable to the MQ-9 Predator-B/Reaper.

Most of China’s new precision-strike systems are for sale. Pakistan and Iran have benefited from China’s ballistic and cruise missile technology, and from sales of conventional systems. Many more countries are likely to consider the $22-million Chengdu FC-1 and $41-million J-10 fighters, especially when equipped with precision-guided munitions like the PL-12 and FT-1. This form of power projection will soon be joined by the PLA’s increasing power-projection capabilities, the subject of the final installment.

Richard D. Fisher, Jr., is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center of Arlington, Va., and author of China’s Military Modernization: Building for Regional and Global Reach (Praeger, 2008).
Photo: Richard D. Fisher, Jr. for DTI

Unsurprisingly, molecular biologists have weighed in with huge caveats and raised fingers of objection. First, they say that DARPA has the wrong idea about hoping to overcome evolution’s supposed randomness, and that evolution really represents a super-efficient design algorithm. Then there’s the problem of guaranteeing immortal life for any biological creature in the first place — just look here and here at some really smart people who have yet to find that fountain of youth.

DARPA has committed just a piddling $6 million out of next year’s budget toward BioDesign. But it will also put $20 million toward a new synthetic biology program and give $7.5 million for speeding up the analysis and editing of cellular genomes. We’re pretty sure that means the Pentagon agency hasn’t considered a future where police “blade runners” help violently “retire” escaped lab replicants of humans.

“It’s too bad she won’t live! But then again, who does?” said Edward Olmos to Harrison Ford in Blade Runner, long before the actor morphed into the gruff but lovable admiral of Battlestar Galactica. Never mind even the experts, let’s trust Olmos. He’s helped hunt down replicants and save humanity from genocidal Cylon robots of our own making. Are you listening, DARPA?

Go wild with the robotic submarine stalkers, the lightning harnessing, and the cyborg insect spies. Just … give this BioDesign thing a bit more thought.

The export sales of state-owned arms exporter Rosoboronexport amounted to 7.4 billion dollars (5.2 billion euros) in 2009, up 10 percent on the previous year, the company’s head Anatoly Isaikin said.

“This is a figure that allows us to look with optimism into the future,” he told reporters, noting that the crisis failed to make a dent in Russia’s overseas arms sales.

Total Russian arms sales were set to top 8.5 billion dollars in 2009, Mikhail Dmitriyev, head of the Federal Service for Military and Technical Cooperation, said last month, citing preliminary estimates.

Rosoboronexport is the leading but not the only exporter of Russian-made weapons.

Isaikin said that as of today Rosoboronexport boasted an order book amounting to 34 billion dollars, including contracts worth 15 billion dollars from last year.

Dmitry Vasilyev, an analyst with the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, said Russian arms sales could be even more significant, were it not for the domestic industry’s inability to keep up with “rather high demand” for Russian arms.

He praised the arms exporter’s current order book, saying that “if there was a breakthrough it was in contracts.”

The United States is the world’s largest arms exporter, followed by several countries, including Russia, Britain and France.

Moscow’s traditional arms customers have been India, China, Algeria and Malaysia, with Venezuela and Syria becoming more recent clients.

Aircraft account for half of all arms exports.

Rosoboronexport is looking to add a number of new clients like Saudi Arabia and Libya as well as NATO member countries, Isaikin said, declining to more specific.

“Currently intensive talks on supplies of all kinds of weapons are under way” with Libya, a Soviet-era client, Isaikin said, adding he hoped the prospect of weapons sales to Saudi Arabia were also “good.”

On Wednesday, Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov discussed possible arms sales with his Libyan counterpart Abu Bakr Younis Jaber but officials did not say whether any firm agreements were in the pipeline.

Russian media reported earlier this week Libya was seeking to buy more than two billion dollars worth of Russian arms including 20 fighter planes.

Asked whether any deals could be signed during the Libyan delegation’s current visit, Isaikin told AFP the talks were “still continuing.”

Officials from Iraq and Afghanistan have also approached the Russians with a view to buying weapons but it would be up to the US administration to determine whether any such deals with Moscow could be possible, Isaikin added.

He reiterated Russia’s traditional stance that Moscow saw no “obstacle” to arms sales to Iran.

He declined however to disclose any new details on Russia’s controversial accord to sell Iran sophisticated S-300 air defence systems, which have yet to be delivered in a deal that alarmed the United States and Israel.

Rosoboronexport, Isaikin said, detected keen interest from foreign countries in the S-400, Russia’s latest generation of air defense missile systems, and “there are a lot of preliminary talks.”

However, the weapons would first be supplied to the country’s own army, while selling it overseas would be a matter of “distant future”, he said.

China took a similar step in 2008 after the former Bush administration announced a multibillion-dollar arms sale to Taiwan — the most sensitive issue in U.S.-China relations. The latest arms sales could complicate the cooperation the U.S. seeks on issues ranging from Iran’s nuclear program to the loosening of Internet controls, including a Google-China standoff over censorship.

China claims the self-governing Taiwan as its own, while the United States is Taiwan’s most important ally and largest arms supplier. The U.S. government is bound by law to ensure the island is able to respond to Chinese threats.

Though Taiwan’s ties with China have warmed considerably since Taiwanese President Ma Ying-jeou took office 20 months ago, Beijing has threatened to invade if the island ever formalizes its de facto independence. China has more than 1,000 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan.

Moreover, the Pentagon reported that China is continuing its ballistic-missile buildup aimed at a force of over 1,000 missiles by 2008. During 2005, China deployed nearly 800 mobile DF-11 and DF-15 short-range ballistic missiles (SRBMs) to bases opposite Taiwan.

“SRBM deployment continues to expand at an average rate of about 100 missiles per year. Newer versions feature improved range and accuracy,” noted the U.S. report.

The arms sale, posted Friday on a Pentagon Web site, includes Black Hawk helicopters, Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missiles, mine hunter ships and information technology. Congress has 30 days to comment before the plan goes forward. Lawmakers traditionally have supported such sales.

Upcoming high-level visits are likely to be affected by the China’s suspension of military exchanges. Gen. Chen Bingde, the Chinese military’s chief of the general staff, was due to visit the U.S., while U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Michael Mullen, Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, had planned to come to China.

A phone call to China’s defense ministry seeking comment was not answered Saturday. A spokeswoman for the U.S. Embassy, Susan Stevenson, said the embassy had no comment on the suspension of military visits.

The two powers are increasingly linked in security and economic issues, and Washington has sought to raise the profile and frequency of military visits with China and build trust with Beijing to convince it to reveal more about the aims of its massive military buildup.

But overall ties have been tense as President Barack Obama plans to meet with the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet, later this year. Further complications from the Taiwan arms sale could affect President Hu Jintao’s expected visit to the U.S. this year, as well as talks on human rights that Obama and Hu had agreed to continue.

Obama’s national security adviser, Jim Jones, said in a speech Friday that both Washington and Beijing do things “periodically that may not make everybody completely happy” but that the United States is “bent toward a new relationship with China as a rising power in the world.”

But experts in China warned it could take further steps to punish the United States to underscore its newfound power and confidence in world affairs.

Also Saturday, Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei warned U.S. Ambassador Jon Huntsman that the $6.4 billion sale would “cause consequences that both sides are unwilling to see.” The vice minister urged that the sale be immediately canceled, it said.

The U.S. is “obstinately making the wrong decision,” China’s Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

Jin Canrong, a professor of international studies at China’s Renmin University, said the sale would give Beijing a “fair and proper reason” to accelerate weapons testing.

Beijing has test-fired rockets in recent weeks for an anti-missile defense system in what security experts said was a display of anger at the pending arms sale.

“The U.S. will pay a price for this. Starting now, China will make some substantial retaliation, such as reducing cooperation on the North Korea and Iran nuclear issues and anti-terrorism work,” Jin added.

The arms package, however, dodges a thorny issue: more advanced F-16 fighter jets that Taiwan covets are not included.

The Pentagon’s decision not to include the fighters and a design plan for diesel submarines — two items Taiwan wants most — “shows that the Obama administration is deeply concerned about China’s response,” said Wang Kao-cheng, a defense expert at Taipei’s Tamkang University.

Taiwan’s president Ma told reporters Saturday that the deal should not anger the mainland because the weapons are defensive, not offensive.

“The weapons sale decision will … allow us to have more confidence and sense of security in developing cross-Strait relations,” he said.