China and Turkey

NATO is not happy with Turkey hosting Chinese Su-27s and MiG-29s last month, for joint air exercises. NATO, especially the U.S., felt that this event allowed China to familiarize themselves with NATO air tactics and operations. 

Previously, these yearly Anatolian Eagle exercises involved Turkish, American and Israeli aircraft. But Turkey is cozying up to China, and other Islamic states, and pulling away from Israel and the West. 

For the last decade, a reform government, with Islamic roots, has ruled the country. While the corruption certainly needed attention, turning towards Islamic nations and away from Israel was not popular with Turkey's Western allies, or many Turks for that matter.

China has pledged to quickly increase trade between the two countries from the current $17 billion a year, to $50 billion. Despite this economic incentive from China.

But Turkey has said it would increase military cooperation with China. Turkey has also held joint training exercises with neighboring Syria, a sworn enemy of Israel.

Kids And Their Toys In Afghanistan

For the last two months, 12,000 NATO troops, and 7,000 Afghan soldiers and police, have been swarming all over Kandahar province, systematically taking down Taliban bases, safe houses, headquarters and bomb workshops. This culminated on the recent air-land assault on the Horn of Panjwai (a hilly, and heavily fortified Taliban base area, 30 kilometers long and 10 kilometers at its widest, shaped like a rhino horn). The Taliban have controlled this rural area for four years, but now admit they have been forced to abandon it. However, the Taliban also say they were return from their Pakistan sanctuaries when the foreign troops leave.
The successful offensive relied on several factors.

Intelligence was the biggest reason. The additional UAVs, intel aircraft and intelligence analysts reaching Afghanistan in the last year have made their mark. Much more is known about the enemy, and the foe can be monitored 24/7 when necessary. The Taliban were surprised at the speed and accuracy of the attacks, and how follow up raids, based on just captured information, were carried out. This was all possible because of good intelligence, that was constantly updated. All these operations were also carried out with little or no publicity. The troops, and the smart munitions, were just suddenly there. Few protracted firefights. Just a lot of initial noise, and then a systematic clean up.

Cell phones are very common throughout Kandahar province. While more tips are coming in from disgruntled Afghans (who are getting tired of the Taliban, even if they are the home team), the Taliban are also very reliant on them. Now the Taliban are well aware of the fact that the Americans can tap into cell phone networks, but too many Taliban use them freely anyway. Smart phones are particularly popular, and newly recruited Taliban will often blow their first month's pay on one, and then do all sorts of stuff with their new toy, providing American intel analysts with lots of useful information. This drives the Taliban leaders nuts, but you know how it is with kids and their toys.

Precision weapons are being used more often, even with the more restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement). The better intel about Taliban hideouts made it more possible to hit targets that did not have local civilians rounded up as human shields. With NATO troops on the move a lot, more Taliban were flushed out into the open. Thus, last month, warplanes made 700 attacks with smart bombs, missiles or cannon fire (more than twice as many as were made in September 2009). Add to that hundred of attack helicopter and UAV attacks, and you have some three dozen attacks a day (and these were often at night). In addition, the American soldiers and marines fired hundreds of GPS guided rockets and 155mm artillery shells. These were particularly unnerving for the Taliban, because they came without any warning. You can often spot a warplane or UAV up in the sky, and head for cover. But the guided 227mm rockets just hit, within a few meters of the aiming point, and could take down an entire compound.

Air mobility allowed assault troops to bypass roads well covered with mines and roadside bombs. The Taliban planned on these roads to slow down approaching troops so that a proper getaway could be organized. Not so when the helicopters came in at night, sometimes after a few smart bombs or guided rockets had hit.

Defeat of the IED (Improvised Explosive Device, the bombs and mines) has deprived the Taliban of their main weapon. Last month, 1,320 IEDs were encountered by NATO and Afghan forces. Most were destroyed, disarmed or simply marked and avoided. Less than 14 percent of them went off, killing 24 foreign troops. It was a repeat of what happened in Iraq, with American troops neutralizing enemy IED tactics faster than those tactics could be modified and improved.

Kandahar has a population of 950,000, about half of it in the city of Kandahar. It's the homeland of the most important Taliban leaders, and many of their early followers. It's second to adjacent Helmand province in opium and heroin production. These two province produce most of the world's heroin.

The Taliban didn't just get hammered in Kandahar, but all across southern Afghanistan, and in those areas of the north where there has been some Taliban activity. A lot of this anti-Taliban activity has actually been aimed at the drug operations the Taliban guard. The heroin gangs have had a bad year, what with a fungus that wiped out half the opium crop, and more attacks on labs (that turn opium into heroin) and caches of drugs and smuggling operations in general. No wonder the Taliban are trying to negotiate a peace deal.

Screw Pakistan

After a recent incident where U.S. helicopter gunships crossed into Pakistan, in hot pursuit of Islamic terrorists, and killed three Pakistani soldiers (and a lot more terrorists), Pakistan cut one of the two NATO supply routes that pass through Pakistan.

Aside from the fact that the Pakistani soldiers fired on the NATO helicopters (which they often do, even when the choppers are on the Afghan side of the border), the U.S. didn't have to remind the Pakistanis that such a gesture was self-defeating. 

The Pakistani government is heavily dependent on American economic and military aid, and more and more of the supplies for foreign troops in Pakistan is coming from non-Pakistani sources. This hurts Pakistani businesses that move, and often provide, the supplies.

At the moment, about half those supplies come through Pakistan. The Pakistanis only closed, for about a day, one of the two main routes. About 30 percent of the supplies come in via Central Asia railroads, and another comes from the Black Sea, via rail to the Afghan border. The remaining 20 percent comes in by air. But some of that may be shifted to the Central Asian route, which is much safer (from bandits, bad roads and the Taliban) than the Pakistan routes.

The U.S. and NATO supplies coming in via railroad from Western Europe, go through Ukraine, Belarus, Russia, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, to Afghanistan. This approach costs $400 a ton to get supplies into Afghanistan, versus three times that to truck it in from Pakistani ports, or $14,000 a ton to fly stuff in. 

 This Central Asian route has been under negotiation since 2003, but Russia kept agreeing to it, and then withdrawing cooperation. What has finally compelled Russia to cooperate in the last year is the growing problems they are having with heroin and opium coming out of Afghanistan into, and through, Russia. 

Shipping supplies to Afghanistan via Russian and Central Asian railroads has advantages for the nations it passes through. Russia has an economic interest in this, as more traffic makes it financially attractive for Central Asian nations to invest in upgrading their rail connections to Afghanistan. Tajikistan, for example, is extending its railroad to the Afghan border by building another 145 kilometers of track. 

Afghanistan itself has no railroads, mainly because there is not enough economic activity in the country to make this worthwhile. Foreign donors have contributed billions of dollars since 2002 to build more paved roads in Afghanistan. Currently, there are 42,000 kilometers of roads there, but only a third  are paved. There are few rivers, much less navigable ones, and no access to the sea. The place has long been a logistical nightmare. 

Most Afghans recognize that roads will make the country more prosperous, by making it economically feasible to export many commodities, and cheaper to bring in, and distribute, foreign goods. Naturally, the Taliban are opposed to all this road building, as it threatens the poverty and ancient customs that Islamic conservatives are so fond of.

Afghanistan's neighbors are eager to trade, and are using the U.S. and NATO need for more access to upgrade their transport links to the country. 

For example, 90 cargo containers were shipped through the Caucasus, via Turkey, Azerbaijan, the Caspian sea and Kazakhstan, to Afghanistan last year, as a test, and regular shipments began shortly thereafter. It's also possible to ship containers across the Caspian to a port in Turkmenistan, and thence to Afghanistan. 

The U.S. and NATO wants to move up to 50,000 containers a year via these new Russian and Caucasus routes. This makes it economically feasible to ship more civilian goods this way. As the traffic increases, it makes economic sense for Afghanistan to start building rail lines, something most nations began doing over a century ago.

Mundane Matters That 'Garet' Trooper and the Drive by Media Misses

The growing number of U.S. troops with operating experience in Afghanistan has led to a style of war that is not fully appreciated by the 'Garet' Trooper back home (or sitting in Kabul).

Thus we have silly situations where 'Garet' Trooper in Kabul and Washington insist that all U.S. troops (except, grudgingly, the Special Forces) be clean shaven.

But out in the hills, where American commanders on their second or third combat tour, now that Afghans are more comfortable dealing with bearded foreigners. It's just a cultural thing. So the captains and colonels ignore the beards, while their bosses don't.

In an unusual event in Afghan history, many Afghans want to work with the foreign soldiers, not kill and rob them.

The ROE (Rules of Engagement) and reconstruction efforts have impressed Afghans. The former spares the lives of Afghan civilians, and the latter makes their lives better.

Despite the Taliban skill at playing the media whenever an Afghan civilian is killed by foreign troops (usually while being used as a human shield by bandits or Taliban), most Afghans want peace and prosperity and to be left alone.

While peace and prosperity are nice, they have been rare events in Afghan history. Being left alone is a more immediate survival skill. This is why, out in the hills, so many people appear to live in little fortresses, carry weapons, and be quick to use them against outsiders (anyone from outside the valley or tribe).

The terrorists are having major problem trying to apply al Qaeda bombing tactics in Afghanistan. There is much more popular opposition to Islamic terrorism in Afghanistan.

In Iraq, you had Sunni Arabs (15-20 percent of the population) and many Shia Arabs (perhaps a fifth of the 60 percent of the population that is Shia) who would provide some form of support for the terrorists. That 20-25 percent of the population shrank as the terrorists had more success killing lots of Iraqis with their bombs.

The same pattern is playing out in Afghanistan, but with less than ten percent of the population supporting the terrorists, and that group is shrinking, Just like in Iraq.

Although the terrorists in Afghanistan are killing fewer people overall (and most of them are still civilians), the media loves to cover explosions.

While the drug gangs are doing well (it's a high profit business, so you can absorb a lot of setbacks), the Taliban are taking a beating. U.S./NATO forces are getting better at finding Taliban gunmen, and leaders, and killing or capturing them.

As usual, the U.S./NATO, with their helicopters and warm clothes, are operating in the Winter. This is the time when Afghans like to hunker down. Poverty, poor diet, lack of adequate clothing and little medical care makes being outside in the Winter a dangerous proposition.

Even though the Taliban is trying to supply it fighters with some modern winter gear and antibiotics, most of these guys head for the hills reluctantly, ill equipped, and with much foreboding. Nothing glorious about dying, shivering, of pneumonia in a cave, while U.S./NATO troops search for you (and often find you, even in caves.)

What U.S./NATO troops are searching for in Winter are weapons and terrorism gear (bomb materials, commo gear and laptops). With so many cell phone equipped civilians ready to give you up, it's hard to find somewhere to hide out in the Winter.

Most of the Taliban can just hide their gun and go home for the Winter. But your key people have to watch over things, and equipment. These are the Winter targets for U.S./NATO operations, and the pickings are richer in the cold weather.

So far this year, there have been 25 attacks on food relief convoys, resulting in nearly a million dollars worth of food being lost. The UN, which administers most of the aid, is not sure how many of the attacks are from bandits, or Taliban. Sometimes the same armed gangs are both. The Taliban are also active in preventing farmers from rebuilding irrigation systems and roads, believing this sort of thing will make the rural farmers more likely to support the government.

Another trouble spot is the growing number of refugees returning to Afghanistan from Pakistan and Iran, as well as the thousands who are now fleeing the army offensive against the Taliban in Pakistan. Over five million refugees have returned since late 2001, and several hundred thousand a year are still coming back. Often, these refugees cannot resume their lives as marginal farmers and migrate to the cities. There they face lots of crime and not a lot of jobs.

The average Afghan is not worried that much about the Taliban (which make up a tiny proportion of the population and largely operate in the south), terrorists (even more rare than the Taliban) or the drug gangs (again, most of it is in a ten percent of the provinces, mainly Helmand).

What really bothers most Afghans is crime (as in robbery, theft and kidnapping) and government incompetence and corruption. The people want a crackdown on crime and corruption. That doesn't make exciting headlines for foreign journalists (except for lots of Afghans wanting to bring back public executions for criminals), but it's what Afghans worry about most of the time.

Iceland Invites The Russians to take over NATO airbase (WTF)

The president of Iceland has offered Russia the use of an abandoned NATO airbase.

The Russians declined, partly because the president of Iceland does not have the authority to make such a deal.

What is happening here is that, at the moment, Iceland is unhappy with their NATO allies. Partly this is the result of the global recession hitting Iceland particularly hard.

That's because Iceland's economic boom was fueled largely by Icelandic banks making heavy use of risky derivatives. This was fine when the global economy was growing, but leverage works both ways, and GDP is expected to contract by at least 15 percent in the next year.

The Icelandic currency has lost over half its value (against major foreign currencies.) Icelanders suddenly feel poor, although unemployment is still under four percent, that is high by local standards. But the real sting has come from the unwillingness of European nations to help bail out the Icelandic banks. This has caused bad feelings towards the NATO countries, which have provided for Icelandic defense for over half a century.

The U.S. has had troops stationed in Iceland since World War II. That's because Iceland has no armed forces of its own, and occupies a strategic position in the north Atlantic.

During the Cold War, U.S. warplanes regularly intercepted Russian maritime patrol aircraft that strayed into Icelandic airspace.

But two years ago, the U.S. Air Force withdrew its fighters. Right about then, Russian long-range patrol aircraft, which had been absent since the Cold War ended in 1991, returned. Since then, Russian aircraft have wandered into Icelandic air space over a dozen times. So the Icelandic Defense Minister (actually the Minister of Justice, who also takes care of military matters), asked NATO for some help.

NATO countries agreed to provide interceptors (usually four at a time) on a rotating basis. But what Iceland would really like is some economic assistance.

Some Icelanders believe that leasing the old air base to the Russians would generate some needed income. A few million dollars goes a long way in Iceland, because the island nation only has a population of 320,000.

What the Drive by Media not telling you about Afghanistan

Banditry has always been a big problem in Afghanistan.

There has never been an effective national police force, and army operations merely caused the bandits to scatter back to their villages.

The basic problem is that there is not one Afghanistan, but hundreds. Each tribe and warlord has its own army which polices its neighborhood. Everything outside that area is considered potentially hostile territory. Men are free to go outside the tribal area and become bandits. Loot taken in battle (or armed robbery) has always been a big deal in Pushtun tribal culture.

So while most Afghans can understand the usefulness of keeping the main road from Kabul to Kandahar open, many of those same Afghans condone their kinsmen robbing people on that highway, as long as it's done to "strangers" (not from our tribe or, even better, foreigners.)

While a lot of Afghans, especially those living in urban areas, try to get away from these medieval attitudes, the majority of those in the countryside are more traditional in their attitudes. This is where a lot of the violence comes from.

Journalists tend to blame it all on the "Taliban," but in fact, most of it is just those gun totting country boys doing what they've always done. More are on the payroll of some drug gang, than a Taliban outfit.

Life would be so much easier, so the conventional wisdom goes, if peace could be obtained by just destroying the "Taliban." But the real enemy is a set of cultural attitudes that aid and abet the lawlessness. It's a much more elusive target.

Cities like Kabul have become very different parts of Afghanistan. You see lots of women without veils (even as Western media report "Taliban terror creeping into Kabul"), and men without beards. Videos and music are freely available, as are alcoholic drinks.

A lot of these city slickers are fresh from the country, where the restrictive lifestyle of "tradition" continues to drive the more adventurous away. This is the sort of thing that offends tribal and religious leaders. These guys don't want change, because it tends to mean less power and money for them. That's why the Taliban has such a following in the countryside, and not in the cities.

News reports about Pakistani troops exchanging fire with NATO and U.S. helicopters at the border appear to be more stories than news. Many of the border guards (a force recruited from local tribes) are pro-Taliban (or on the Taliban payroll), and quick to fire on aircraft and any armed men they are not familiar with.

That's been going on for decades, and was the cause of tension with the Russians in the 1980s.

Real violence between Pakistan and the United States is unlikely, because the U.S. is the major financial and military supplier for Pakistan. Thus without U.S. support, military upgrades don't happen and the economy tanks. Religion is one thing, defense and economics are something else (that is more important to more Pakistanis).

Meanwhile, the government makes the right noises about "defending Pakistan's borders" while doing nothing to actually interfere with American operations on either side of the border.

Over 20,000 Pushtuns have fled from Pakistan into Afghanistan to avoid the violence between Taliban gunmen and the Pakistani army.

The Pakistani Taliban are under attack in several areas (Waziristan, Swat Valley and Bajaur) and losing in all of them. The head of the Pakistani Taliban has just died, after being ill for several months, leaving behind a power struggle. The Pakistani Taliban is in disarray and falling apart. This is being felt in Afghanistan, where fewer "volunteers" are coming across to help out the Taliban there.

In the face of this, the Afghan Taliban say they will keep fighting throughout the Winter. NATO responds by announcing another Winter offensive. This will get interesting, because NATO forces are more mobile in Winter.

Traditionally, Afghans stay indoors during the Winter. Getting a chill can be fatal, and the rain, snow and ice make it difficult to get around.

The government has again openly called for Taliban leader Mullah Omar to come negotiate with the government. This comes in the wake of several years worth of successful negotiations with lower level Taliban leaders.

Many of these guys have left the Taliban as a result. There are also reports, denied by the government, that Saudi Arabia is sponsoring secret peace talks between the government and the Taliban.

One has to ask, why would the Taliban want to negotiate? Put simply, while the drug gangs are doing well (despite heroin production falling 20 percent from last year), the Taliban are on everyone's hit list, and are taking a lot of hits.

Now defeated al Qaeda operatives are moving in from Iraq and elsewhere, and blowing people up. That generates more hostility than support, and this hurts the Taliban as well.

Within the Taliban, a debate is on over how to deal with the lack of progress. The Taliban have been able to generate more violence, and dire headlines in the West, but not much else.

True believers are getting discouraged.

U.S. and NATO commanders believe they can largely shut down the Taliban and al Qaeda if they have some more troops. The U.S. has agreed to send three more brigades next year. NATO nations, urged on by France, are trying to muster more troops for Afghanistan.

By next year, changes in Pakistan, and growing attacks on Afghan drug gangs are expected to weaken the Taliban even more.

The new government in Pakistan is behind the recent army offensives against the Taliban, and has just replaced the head of their intelligence agency, the ISI, which originally invented the Taliban back in the 1990s.

The ISI has long been full of Islamic conservatives, but the new head is different. How different will become apparent by early next year.

U.S. 7th Army Fades Away In Europe

After spending over half a century years in Europe, the headquarters of the U.S. 7th Army headquarters is reorganizing as a deployable unit (meaning it can be ordered to another part of the world to supervise major military operations.)

The 7th Army headquarters ceased to be very mobile as it commanded a growing force of European based U.S. combat units in the 1950s. But this force went from two corps and over six divisions (18 combat brigades) during the Cold War, to the current four brigades (which are also subject to duty in distant combat zones, like Iraq or Afghanistan).

During the Cold War, there were over 300,000 U.S. troops in Western Europe, now it's about 40,000, and headed for 33,000 in five years. And if there's a crises somewhere else on the planet, there won't even be an army headquarters there to command what's left of American forces.

Taliban spin, with help by the Drive by Media

One thing that really irritates U.S. and NATO commanders in Afghanistan is the ability of the Taliban to constantly make false claims about foreign troops killing civilians, and getting away with it.

The problem is that the Taliban can make claims of civilian casualties in some remote part of the country, and many Moslem media outlets will immediately accept it without question.

Then many Western mass media outlets will also pick it up, often citing the media in Moslem countries as a source. Many of the Moslem, and non-Moslem editors know they are being played, because nearly all these claims eventually turn out to be false. But bad news is news and retractions are buried in the back of the paper (and rarely make it onto radio or TV news at all).

The Taliban deliberately try to spend the night among civilians, and store weapons and supplies in residential areas. And when the civilians try to flee, the Taliban will keep them around by force (well, just by pointing their guns in the right direction).

This doesn't get much publicity, and the Taliban get away with claiming their dead were actually innocent civilians.

All this is particularly troublesome for the Afghan government, which is constantly forced to go along with the false claims, because most Afghans are illiterate, and all they hear are the initial false claims.

So the government is forced to go along with the false claims, even when they know that, in most cases, they are simply being played by the Islamic terrorists.

Georgia Joins The NATO Grid

Although Georgia has not been able to join NATO, it has been able to link it's air defense radars with NATOs air defense system.

NATO engineers and technicians recently devised ways to link the signals from the Russian made radars used in Georgia, to the monitoring systems used by the NATO air defense network.

The signals from Georgia are sent by satellite to Europe, where NATO air defense controllers can see, in real time, what is going on over Georgia.

This makes it more difficult for the Russians to violate Georgian air space, then lie about it.

NATO nations are also sending Georgia new weapons, including portable anti-aircraft missiles. The Russians are not happy about this, and are using a loophole in the ceasefire agreement negotiated in France last month, to raid Georgian bases and continue destroying equipment.

Another Rhineland...

Russia has announced that it will, in effect, annex the Georgian separatist regions of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

No one is willing to face down the Russians on this issue, which many of Russias neighbors see as the first of many such annexations.

There is a precedent for this sort of thing, and it all began on the French-German border in 1936.

Some historians see the German reoccupation of the Rhineland in 1936 as the real beginning of World War II.

As part of the treaty that ended World War I, Germany agreed to keep troops out of the Rhineland (a German region on the French border). Going back in was a huge gamble for the Germans, who were in the midst of rebuilding their military, and, in 1936, much weaker than France or Britain.

But neither of these countries were willing to risk the violence that might occur if they went after the 32,000 troops and police Germany sent into the Rhineland. This convinced Hitler that he could bully the Western allies, and grab neighboring countries with impunity.

This worked for Austria and Czechoslovakia, but triggered World War II when Germany and Russia (by prior agreement) carved up Poland in 1939.

Russia may not have its sights on Poland this time around, but Belarus, Ukraine, the Baltic States and a few of the Central Asian "stans" would be nice. Would, or could, anyone stop them?

Hitler didn't have nuclear weapons, nor was Germany the supplier of a quarter of Europe's energy needs. Hitler also didn't have the support of the German people for such military adventures, the current Russian government does. Russia also still has its secret police apparatus.

Perhaps not as large as when the Soviet Union was still around, but it's still there. Credit Cards, the Internet and cell phones make it easier to keep track of people. There are still KGB old timers around who remember how to run a prison camps.

Absorbing the nations of the "near abroad" (as Russia calls its neighbors), would mean having to deal with a lot of dissidents. That's what the Gulag (the Russian acronym for the prison camp system, or "The Chief Administration of Corrective Labor Camps and Colonies") was created for. It gets the troublemakers off the streets, permanently, as needed. Puts the fear of Moscow into the newly acquired citizens of the Russian State. It worked before, it can work again. So did taking over the Rhineland.

Patriots For Poland

As part of the recent agreement to allow U.S. THAAD anti-missile missiles to be based in Poland, is the stationing of an American Patriot anti-aircraft missile battery in Poland. Originally, Poland wanted to receive Patriot missile systems, with Polish crews running them. Sending an American battery instead was a compromise. That unit will arrive within the next four years.

The U.S. Army has ten of its Patriot anti-aircraft missile battalions. Each Patriot battalion has 12-24 launchers (3-6 batteries). Each battery is manned by about a hundred troops, and contains a radar, plus four launchers. A battery can fire two types of Patriot missile. The $3.3 million PAC 3 missile is smaller than the anti-aircraft version (PAC 2), thus a Patriot launcher can hold sixteen PAC 3 missiles, versus four PAC 2s. A PAC 2 missile weighs about a ton, a PAC 3 weighs about a third of that. The PAC 3 has a shorter range (about 20 kilometers) versus 70 kilometers for the anti-aircraft version.

While each Patriot launcher, loaded with PAC 3 missiles, can only defend against ballistic missiles approaching within 20 kilometers, the Patriot radar can detect targets out to a hundred kilometers. Two PAC 3 missiles are fired at each incoming ballistic missile, to increase the probability of a hit. The PAC 3 missile has its own radar, and uses it to track the incoming warhead, and execute a collision course.

Implications of Russian Cyber Battles

Implications of
Russian Cyber Battles
By Colin Clark

When the history of the Russian invasion of Georgia is written, one of the most revealing discussions may center on the role of cyber warfare.

Some questions that will need answering: Just when did Russian hackers begin their attacks on the Georgian websites. Just what role did NATO — especially Estonian and American — cyber warriors have in guiding the Georgian response. Was the enormous three-week attack on Estonia last April from Russia a practice run for the Georgian attack?

When the Russians crippled Estonia’s cyber infrastructure, NATO dispatched top cyber war experts to investigate and to improve the Estonians’ electronic defenses.

It seems reasonable that, in the event of a true combined operation against the Georgians, NATO dispatched cyber experts to help though I haven’t confirmed that yet. There are numerous reports that Estonia has sent cyber warriors to help the Georgians combat both countries historic nemesis.

Official and unofficial Pentagon spokesmen refused to comment on whether the US might or might not be assisting the Georgians in their efforts to protect their Internet infrastructure.

However, one source said that if any US agency would be helping the Georgians it would be the Department of Homeland Security. The reason: if the Russians were to learn the Pentagon was assisting the Georgians they could claim the US was waging cyber war against them.

And US policy is that attacks on our computer systems can be considered an act of war, a logic the Russians would be sure to follow. If DHS is assisting the Georgians then we can make it very clear that US efforts are purely defensive. Also, DHS is home to the Computer Emergency Response Team.

All this raises questions about the US approach to cyber warfare — not defensive and security measures, but the willingness to use the web to attack an enemy to blunt or cripple their offensive capabilities.

As one of my wittier sources put it earlier today: Are the Georgians really more afraid of a cyber attack than of all those missiles raining down on their heads. The global World Wide Web may be incredibly resilient, but local web connections can be seriously disrupted by those old timey capabilities known as kinetics. Destroy phone or cable connections –easily done with artillery or bombs — and you’ve made it a lot harder to rebuild and reconnect than would a denial of service attack. On top of the destruction, an enemy can send a much clearer and simpler signal than can be done through cyber attacks. On the other hand, it is the very ambiguity of a cyber attack that can make it such a powerful tool in the times before a conflict erupts. Ask the Russians and the Estonians.

Sarkozy says France to stay in Afghanistan

President Nicolas Sarkozy vowed Tuesday that France will not abandon the international mission in Afghanistan despite 10 French troops being killed and 21 wounded in a Taliban ambush.

Sarkozy left for Afghanistan late Tuesday after the deadliest ground attack on foreign troops in Afghanistan since the US-led war in 2001 that ousted the Taliban.

"In its struggle against terrorism, France has just been hard hit," said Sarkozy in a statement before flying out on a trip accompanied by Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner and Defence Minister Herve Morin.

The president said he was travelling to Kabul to reassure the 3,000 French troops serving in the NATO force of more than 40,000 that "France is at their side."

Offering condolences to the soldiers' families, Sarkozy said France would not be deterred from its Afghan mission.

"My determination is intact. France is committed to pursuing the struggle against terrorism, for democracy and for freedom.

"This is a just cause, it is an honour for France and for its army to defend it," he said.

The 10 soldiers were killed during fighting on Monday and Tuesday following the ambush on a joint NATO reconnaissance mission with the Afghan national army in Sarobi district, 50 kilometres (30 miles) east of Kabul.

Twenty four French troops have now been killed in action or in accidents in Afghanistan since they first arrived in 2002.

It was the deadliest attack on French troops since a 1983 assault in Beirut in which 58 French paratroopers serving in a UN force were killed.

"Serious measures, notably in the air, were taken to support and extricate our men caught in an extremely violent ambush," Sarkozy said.

A key Taliban leader was wounded in the fighting, army chief of staff Jean-Louis Georgelin said, while Morin estimated casualties on the Taliban side at some 30 dead and 30 injured.

Morin said the 21 wounded French soldiers were in stable condition and that some would be flown back to Paris soon.

"There were very violent battles that lasted several hours and an operation is still ongoing in the zone," said Morin.

Sarkozy announced French reinforcements to Afghanistan at a NATO summit in April, drawing fierce criticism at home from left-wing opponents who see the broadened involvement as a sign of French alignment with US policy.

The opposition Socialists on Tuesday called for an emergency debate in parliament, with party leader Francois Hollande saying the military losses raised questions that "deserve a quick answer."

Hollande said parliament needs to consider: "What are the goals of this war? How many troops will be needed to achieve its stated objectives? What has been achieved by the military action and the reconstruction effort waged since 2001?".

Buoyed by opinion polls showing a majority of the French opposed to the beefed-up French mission in Afghanistan, the Socialists tabled a no-confidence vote against Sarkozy in April that was defeated by the right-wing majority.

The far-right also weighed in with criticism on Tuesday.

"These soldiers were doing their duty, but they did not die for France. They died in an unending war that the United States is waging in that country for its own interests," said far-right leader Jean-Marie Le Pen.

"Our soldiers should not be killed for Uncle Sam," he said in a statement.

Pollster Bruno Jeanbart said French politicians "will have to explain better to the French what is the role of their soldiers there, what they do there."

Kouchner told a NATO meeting in Brussels that the French troops died while "fighting for a part of world peace."

NATO is supporting the weak government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai against the Taliban.

The trip will be Sarkozy's second to Afghanistan following a visit on December 22.

France's contingent in Afghanistan has been mostly deployed in the Kabul area and the province of Kapisa, northeast of the capital.

HOO-AH: POLAND TAKES THE SHIELD - TELL KREMLIN UP YOUR !

A top Russian general said Friday that Poland's agreement to accept a U.S. missile interceptor base exposes the ex-communist nation to attack, possibly by nuclear weapons, the Interfax news agency reported.

The statement by Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn is the strongest threat that Russia has issued against the plans to put missile defense elements in former Soviet satellite nations.

Poland and the United States on Thursday signed a deal for Poland to accept a missile interceptor base as part of a system the United States says is aimed at blocking attacks by rogue nations. Moscow, however, feels it is aimed at Russia's missile force.

"Poland, by deploying (the system) is exposing itself to a strike—100 percent," Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of staff, was quoted as saying.

He added, in clear reference to the agreement, that Russia's military doctrine sanctions the use of nuclear weapons "against the allies of countries having nuclear weapons if they in some way help them." Nogovitsyn that would include elements of strategic deterrence systems, he said, according to Interfax.

At a news conference earlier Friday, Nogovitsyn had reiterated Russia's frequently stated warning that placing missile-defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic would bring an unspecified military response. But his subsequent reported statement substantially stepped up a war of words.

U.S. officials have said the timing of the deal was not meant to antagonize Russian leaders at a time when relations already are strained over the recent fighting between Russia and Georgia over the separatist Georgian region of South Ossetia.

Russian forces went deep into Georgia in the fighting, raising wide concerns that Russia could be seeking to occupy parts of its small, pro-U.S. neighbor, which has vigorously lobbied to join NATO, or even to force its government to collapse.

"I think the Russian behavior over the last several days is generally concerning not only to the United States but to all of our European allies," said Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman, when asked about Russian threats against Poland as a result of the missile defense agreement.

He also suggested that earlier U.S. offers for broad cooperation with Moscow on the missile defense program may be reevaluated considering the latest developments.

Under the agreement that Warsaw and Washington reached Thursday, Poland will accept a U.S. missile interceptor base.

Washington says the planned system, which is not yet operational, is needed to protect the U.S. and Europe from possible attacks by missile-armed "rogue states" like Iran. The Kremlin, however, feels it is aimed at Russia's missile force and warns it will worsen tensions.

In an interview on Poland's news channel TVN24, Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said the United States agreed to help augment Poland's defenses with Patriot missiles in exchange for placing 10 missile defense interceptors in the Eastern European country.

He said the deal also includes a "mutual commitment" between the two nations to come to each other's assistance "in case of trouble."

That clause appeared to be a direct reference to Russia.

Poland has all along been guided by fears of a newly resurgent Russia, an anxiety that has intensified with Russia's offensive in Georgia. In past days, Polish leaders said that fighting justified Poland's demands that it get additional security guarantees from Washington in exchange for allowing the anti-missile base on its soil.

"Simply the existence of this installation increases Poland's security," Polish President Lech Kaczynski said Friday.

Hoo-ah: Lessons Of The Iraq War

As the U.S. armed forces have done so many times before, they entered the uncertainty of a new war in 2001, and are now trying to figure out what they gained from it. Most of what went on during this war was unreported or misreported. This is nothing new. The important details, and lessons, of all past American wars were poorly reported, and what the military is trying to avoid is taking away the wrong lessons.

Throughout the current conflict, the military made no secret of what they were doing, and just kept focused on winning. They knew they would be dealing with an unusual enemy, a stateless force based on ideology and religion based hatred. This foe was weak, in the conventional military sense, but was armed with two powerful weapons. First, there was the suicide bomber, and terrorism in general. Against civilian populations, this was a very effective weapon. Against a professional and resourceful military foe, it was much less so. But the enemy had another weapon; the media and political opposition in their opponents homeland. The media is eager to report real or imagined disasters and mistakes. This is how the news business has stayed solvent since the mass media first appeared in the mid 19th century. Al Qaeda was run by people who were aware of this, and knew how to exploit it, both among friendly (Moslem) populations, and in nations they had declared their enemy. This they did by exploiting the proclivities of the political oppositions in the West.

Many in the West considered terrorism a police matter. But al Qaeda believed that if they could turn it into a military campaign, by getting Western nations to use military force, they would trigger an angry reaction among Moslems. Al Qaeda had long preached that the West was the enemy of Islam, and a Western invasion of Moslem nations would prove this. They also knew that many in the West would not approve of military action. These politicians, and their followers, would continue to insist on treating Islamic terrorism as a police matter. This would cause political turmoil in the West, and weaken counter-terror operations.

The invasion of Afghanistan, after September 11, 2001, did indeed enrage many Moslems, even though many of them admitted that the Taliban government there had provided bases for al Qaeda. But the Islamic terrorists also took advantage of the fact that Moslems did not use the same logic as Westerners. Even after the Taliban government quickly fell in late 2001, to an "invasion force" of only 300 NATO troops (U.S. Army special forces and CIA agents), many Moslems insisted this was an unwarranted attack on a Moslem nation. This despite the fact that most Afghans wanted to be rid of the Taliban. And then it got worse, as many Moslems insisted that al Qaeda did not carry out the September 11, 2001 attacks. Many Moslems(and some in the West) still believe that the Israelis were behind it, or that the Americans staged an attack on themselves to provide an excuse to make war on Islamic nations. Al Qaeda knew how to exploit fantasies and cultural biases, even while al Qaeda leaders were taking credit for the 911 attacks.

The invasion of Iraq was even more contentious. In hindsight, the Iraq operation was essential to the defeat of al Qaeda, and the shattering of their popular support in the Moslem world. Al Qaeda, true to its own beliefs and tactics, tried to use terror attacks against the Shia Arab majority in Iraq, after 2003, as a way to put the Sunni Arab minority back in control. All this did was kill thousands of Moslem civilians and deflate popular support for al Qaeda. This could be seen, year by year, as opinion polls in Moslem countries revealed declining al Qaeda popularity.

But al Qaeda still had a lot of Support in the West. The political opposition in the United States, true to form (as in all past American wars) found ways to criticize the Iraq operation without actually joining the enemy. The media in the West backed the opposition, as that's where the headlines, and the profits, were.

Out of all this, the American military found other lessons. Their professional and resourceful troops found ways to neutralize enemy weapons (suicide and roadside bombs) while keeping their casualty rate at less than half what it was in Vietnam and pervious wars. The generals got no credit, in the media, for that, but the troops sure appreciated it. This resulted in the volunteer military to maintain its strength in wartime, the first time the U.S. had accomplished that since the American Revolution.

The troops developed a wide array of new techniques for fighting "irregular wars" (where the opponent is not a regular army.) The military adapted many new technologies to this new kind of war (smart bombs, data mining, forensics, persistent surveillance and lots of modern police techniques). The new problem is transferring as much of this new knowledge to future conventional wars. And there will be a transference. Most other major military powers are also trying to figure that out, so they can also profit from the American success.

Finally, the continued hammering the military is taking, for "failing" in this new kind of war, at least makes it less likely that there will be a problem with the victory disease (where winning brings with it complacency and all the ills that follow believing your own press releases.)

The New Taliban Tactics Have a Catch

The Afghan government believes that key leaders in the Pakistani army and intelligence service (the ISI) are still making deals, some of them secret, with the Taliban and Islamic radical groups, to make it easier for Afghanistan to be attacked, while providing Pakistan some immunity from terrorism. This kind of cynical arrangement is a staple of politics, especially in the Moslem world.

Islamic radical groups will grant such immunity from attack in return for favors, then later resume attacks. So while the Afghan accusations may sound bizarre to Western ears, they make a lot of sense along the Afghan-Pakistan border. Behind the scenes, the U.S. is trying to get the Pakistani army and ISI to change their strategy, but that is not easy. The generals leading both organizations (and the current head of the Pakistani military used to head ISI) are more concerned with self-preservation in the long term, than in eliminating Taliban activity inside Afghanistan. To the Pakistani generals, the Taliban are just another in a long line of tribal troublemakers. And it's traditional to deal with these fellows using bluff and bluster, rather than anything more expensive (like bullets and soldiers lives). Ideally, you'd like to get the tribes fighting each other, which is exactly what is happening when the Taliban go to Afghanistan. This year, however, there is an additional complication. Several thousand al Qaeda terrorists (or recruits) have showed up, the aftereffect of the al Qaeda defeat in Iraq. It's not yet clear how many of the al Qaeda men will cross the border, or stay and try to take control of Pakistan. The ISI is negotiating, hoping to get most of these new thugs into Afghanistan. But al Qaeda needs Pakistan as a base, and NATO is leaning on Pakistan hard to not allow that.

The Taliban have developed more effective tactics this year. After a disastrous outing last year, the Taliban were under a lot of pressure to reduce their casualties this year, and they have. The Afghans have always been adaptable, especially when it is a matter of life and death, and there have been many small changes in Taliban tactics to counter the greater lethality of NATO forces (who use UAVs, smart bombs and better trained troops). Taliban forces now operate in smaller groups, keeping weapons (which can be identified from the air by UAV or aircraft cameras) hidden, and concentrate forces just before an attack. Cell phones and walkie-talkies make this easier. Taliban will also break off an attack quickly, knowing that the smart bombs are on the way. The Taliban will stay near the Pakistani border, because the Americans and NATO rarely pursue, although smart bombs are more frequently dropped on the Pakistani side. But once a group of armed Taliban have made it into Pakistan, they can melt into the civilian population. Which leads to another popular Taliban tactic, using civilians as human shields. It doesn't always work, and when it doesn't the Taliban are quick to claim another NATO atrocity. The Taliban have also been using a growing number of deceptions to try and get NATO smart bombs or artillery to hit friendly targets. A favorite one on the border is to fire mortar shells at NATO troops on one side of the border, and at nearby Pakistani border guards just across the frontier, to try and deceive NATO and Pakistani troops into believing they are firing at each other. NATO counter-fire radars have spotted the shells, and traced them all back to the same location. But such radars are not always available, and sometimes this trick works. Another deception is feed bad intel to the followers, and try and trigger a missile or smart bomb attack on civilians.

This year's Taliban tactics, however, are more disruptive and less concerned with taking permanent control of territory. The Taliban is trying to disrupt the Afghan government control (which was never very great to begin with), and wear down the foreign troops (and cause popular discontent back home that will lead to NATO forces being recalled). The Taliban are playing the long game, which is how things are done up in these hills, when you are dealing with a more powerful opponent. The Taliban have no doubt that their foe (the Afghan government and their foreign allies) are more powerful. The foreign troops in particular, are very deadly. The older Taliban, who fought the Russians in the 1980s, note that the NATO and U.S. troops are all equal to the small number of commandos the Russians used. Back then, the only Russians the Afghans feared were the few thousand paratroopers and Spetsnaz commandos they sometimes encountered. When that happened, the Afghans knew it was time to retreat, quickly. But now, even the Afghan Army troops are more lethal. They have been trained by the Westerners, and that has made a difference. But most of the opponents the Taliban face are anti-Taliban (or pro-government, there is a difference) tribal fighters. The "Taliban War" is basically a tribal conflict, just as it was back in the 1980s, against the Russians, and in the 1990s, when the Taliban captured Kabul, and almost took over the entire country (cut short by the U.S. invasion of late 2001.)

The Taliban are paying more attention to extortion and taking over business operations, on both sides of the border. The Taliban may be on a Mission From God, but God's children have expenses and must get paid. The more the better. The tribal areas are poor, and the Taliban attracts a better grade of roughneck if they can pay better. The Taliban leaders, in particular, want more reliable gunmen, if only to provide themselves with better personal security. NATO has stepped up efforts to track down and kill the Taliban and al Qaeda leadership. This is happening more often, and is disrupting Taliban operations in areas where key leaders are taken out. The American get more cooperation from Afghans in this, because the Taliban have increased their attacks on reconstruction projects. This year, more efforts are being made to kidnap foreign aid workers, and hold them for ransom. The Taliban could kill these guys, but the ransom routine has the same demoralizing effect on the aid workers, and raises badly needed cash as well. In the last week, two French aid workers were grabbed, and two Turkish ones were released, after ransom was paid, after being held a week.

The U.S. is doubling the number of MRAPs (armored trucks designed to deflect mine and roadside bomb explosions) in Afghanistan (to 1,600). These must be driven in from Pakistani ports. That will come in handy, because the Taliban are trying to take down the road based NATO supply line, that stretches from the Pakistani coast into Afghanistan. These trucks are protected by lucrative security arrangements made with tribes that "own" the roads. These guys don't like seeing this income threatened by a bunch of religious fanatics. Most of this fighting is taking place on the Pakistani side of the border, and NATO has quietly told the Pakistanis that if these supply lines cannot be protected, NATO would have to come in and do it. This, more than anything else, motivates the Pakistanis to tone down Taliban violence, at least on the Pakistani side of the border.

July 16, 2008: Despite new tactics, the Taliban still get chewed up pretty badly. A Taliban war band, of about 300 men, was spotted as it crossed over from Pakistan, and quickly jumped on by NATO troops and smart bombs. About half the Taliban were killed, and the rest wounded, captured, or scattered. It's catastrophes like this that force the Taliban to pay better, and to encourage their commanders to keep their fighters dispersed. But many of the Taliban big shots are traditionalists, and just love the feeling of leading a column of several armed men through the mountains. It's a tradition that's become an expensive luxury, one that often costs you your life.

Hoo-ah: NATO Cowards Called To Accoun

U.S., British, Canadian and Dutch diplomats are leaning hard on other NATO members to provide more meaningful support in Afghanistan. This is not the first time such complaints have been made, but because U.S., British, Canadian and Dutch troops are doing nearly all the fighting, while most of the 50,000 NATO troops (particularly the Germans and French) stay in the north, where there is very little action, tempers are getting short.

What particularly irritates the four "fighting nations" are the 70-80 "special instructions" the other NATO nations have attached to the use of their troops in Afghanistan.

This pressure has had some effect. France is moving some of its combat troops to eastern Afghanistan, where there has been an increase in the number of Pakistani Taliban crossing the border. Some nations have offered to send much needed helicopters and medical units, but even this will take time. Since the end of the Cold War in 1991, most European nations have sharply cut their military spending (as a percentage of GDP), and just let their armed forces quietly fall apart. This has become embarrassingly obvious as they are now called on to step up help out in Afghanistan. Many politicians said yes, only to find themselves caught short by the realities of their decrepit armed forces.

The U.S. has been trying to supply more troops, but this is unpopular in the face of other NATO members shirking their responsibilities. Some 2,200 American marines are leaving in November, and the U.S. Army is reluctant to send another brigade to Afghanistan, after they just chased al Qaeda out of Iraq. Remnants of the terrorist organizations have fled to Pakistan, but the defeat in Iraq has hurt recruiting and fund raising worldwide. Even NATO politicians realize that this is an opportunity to deliver another crushing defeat to the Islamic terrorists, if only they have enough fighting troops in Afghanistan.

Taliban Seek To Regain The Magic

In Afghanistan, the Taliban are trying out a lot of new tactics, trying to find something that works. The recent prison break in Kandahar worked, but partly because the government had been sloppy, and had ignored NATO warnings, over a year ago, about security vulnerabilities in that jail. Two suicide bombers and a few dozen gunmen got nearly a thousand prisoners out of the jail. There's also suspicion that there was some inside help. That, alas, is quite common in Afghanistan.

But elsewhere, the new Taliban ideas have been failures. Shortly after the jail break incident, nearly 500 Taliban rode into a dozen villages south of Kandahar, took control of ten villages, and basically challenged the government to do something about it. The government, and some NATO troops quickly did so, and the Taliban troops were promptly driven out, with about half of them being killed, wounded or captured.

The Taliban have brought over 10,000 gunmen into the country from Pakistan. They have learned to bring most of these guys in as civilians, because the millions of dollars the Taliban are earning by "taxing" the drug gangs, enables them to buy weapons in Afghanistan for their Pakistani recruits. Most of these kids, and a lot of them are teenagers, recruited from religious schools, are pretty green. They have been studying the Koran for the last year or so, not how to move around the hills and fire a weapon. But these youngsters do have religion, and that makes it easy to use them as enforcers for the lifestyle rules the Taliban wants to impose. That means all women are covered up when outdoors, do not work outside the home, and don't go to school. For the men, no barbers, no music, no videos, no booze, no sex before marriage, not much fun at all. Many of these kids only use their guns to bully Afghan civilians. When faced with Afghan or NATO troops, the Pakistanis tend to quickly die, or flee, or both.

Even with all this effort, the overall casualty rate so far this year has been less than half what it was last year. The Taliban are active this year, but so more it's mostly smoke, and not a lot of fire. It's the NATO and government forces that are on the offensive this year, and the Taliban is desperate to change this embarrassing state of affairs.

Hoo-ah: Afghanistan Becomes The Most Dangerous Place...for the Bad Guys LOL

Last month, two trends collided. It's now more dangerous for U.S. (and NATO) troops to be in Afghanistan, compared to Iraq.

In May, U.S. troops suffered 19 dead in Iraq. On an annualized basis, that's 1.6 troops per thousand (per year). Still dangerous, but not particularly scary.

In Afghanistan, U.S. and NATO troops suffered 29 dead in May. On an annualized basis, that's 5 troops per thousand (per year). There are about twice as many foreign troops in Iraq compared to Afghanistan. If the trends continue, this year will see Afghanistan being 2-3 times as dangerous for foreign troops, compared to Iraq.

Violence in Afghanistan is actually running at about half the level of last year, but NATO and Afghan troops are operating more aggressively this year. Unlike the past two years, there was no big "Taliban Spring Offensive" this year. Instead, government and foreign troops are attacking Taliban and drug gang control of parts of southern Afghanistan (where most of the world's terrorism currently comes from.)

It's a different kind of war in Afghanistan, with the enemy taking higher losses than their Iraqi counterparts. Al Qaeda has shifted its operations to Pakistan and Afghanistan, and is using the same tactics that caused it to be defeated in Iraq.

Yes, it sounds idiotic. But these are the same people who believe they get 72 virgins (to abuse for eternity) when they are killed in combat, and seriously believe that if they keep fighting long enough, the world will become one big Islamic religious dictatorship, where women will live very restricted lives and all the men will wear beards. If it weren't for all the innocents these maniacs kill, it would be comic. But they do, and it isn't.

Poland Says It Has Agreed to US Shield

Poland Says It Has Agreed

to US Shield
By DESMOND BUTLER

Poland said Friday it has reached an agreement in principle with the United States on plans to install a missile defense system on Polish territory.

Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski says that after meetings with U.S. officials, he is satisfied that the United States will deal with security problems that Poland wanted addressed as part of an eventual deal.

The announcement should add momentum to a project the Bush administration has said it hopes to start building this year. The project, a major source of tension with Russia, had looked stalled since the Polish government of Donald Tusk sought new demands after taking office in November.

Sikorski did not outline the terms of the deal, but in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice after a working lunch, the two officials suggested that the U.S. would help with Polish air defenses, as Poland had sought.

"We understand that there is a desire for defense modernization in Poland, and particularly for air defense modernization in Poland," Rice said. "This is something that we support because it will make our ally, Poland, more capable, it will make Poland, as the foreign minister has said, more able to operate with us."

Sikorski said that negotiators would continue to work on the details of an agreement that would allow the U.S. to install 10 interceptors as part of a long- range European missile defense system.

"We are not at the end of the road as regards negotiations. We are in the middle of the road," he said. "We have an agreement in principle."

He sought to address concerns about the U.S. air defense aid that are likely to be expressed by Russia, which has already strongly objected to the missile defense plans. Russia has threatened to retarget nuclear missiles at Poland to counter what it sees as a U.S. attempt to undermine the Russian military deterrent.

"The reinforced Polish air defenses are not directed against anybody," Sikorski said. "They are to enable Poland to be a stronger NATO ally with the United States, to enable Poland to take part in operations, in out-of-area operations, in joint operations."

But the air defense system that Poland has asked for help in building would seem to be aimed at addressing worries about Russia's threats. Polish officials have previously expressed interest in acquiring short- and mid-range air defenses—Patriot or THAAD missiles—from the United States.

The United States has dismissed Russian concerns about the proposed long range missile defense system, saying it is intended to protect Western countries from missiles fired from Iran and would be impotent against Russia's massive arsenal.

"It is true that the United States once had a Strategic Defense Initiative, a program that was intended to deal with the question of the Russian strategic nuclear threat," Rice said, referring to a Reagan-era program also known as Star Wars. "This is not that program. This is not the son of that program. This is not the grandson of that program."

If the two sides reach a deal, it would vindicate Tusk and Sikorski's strategy of asking more from Washington in exchange for Poland's support in military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the missile defense system.

The previous Polish government of former Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, who opened talks early last year, firmly supported the plan without the additional demands.