WAR trouble brewing again in ukraine

Lurker

Lurker

14
Will get very spicy all over there if it goes hot.

pipeline.jpg
 
P

Plain Jane

Just Plain Jane

Zerohedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
www.zerohedge.com www.zerohedge.com

Escobar: Putin Rewrites The Law Of The Geopolitical Jungle
Tyler Durden's Photo

BY TYLER DURDEN
SATURDAY, APR 24, 2021 - 11:20 PM
Authored by Pepe Escobar via The Saker blog,
Putin’s address to the Russian Federal Assembly – a de facto State of the Nation – was a judo move that left Atlanticist sphere hawks particularly stunned...


The “West” was not even mentioned by name. Only indirectly, or via a delightful metaphor, Kipling’s Jungle Book. Foreign policy was addressed only at the end, almost as an afterthought.

For the best part of an hour and a half, Putin concentrated on domestic issues, detailing a series of policies that amount to the Russian state helping those in need – low income families, children, single mothers, young professionals, the underprivileged – with, for instance, free health checks all the way to the possibility of an universal income in the near future.

Of course he would also need to address the current, highly volatile state of international relations. The concise manner he chose to do it, counter-acting the prevailing Russophobia in the Atlanticist sphere, was quite striking.

First, the essentials. Russia’s policy “is to ensure peace and security for the well-being of our citizens and for the stable development of our country.”

Yet if “someone does not want to…engage in dialogue, but chooses an egoistic and arrogant tone, Russia will always find a way to stand up for its position.”

He singled out “the practice of politically motivated, illegal economic sanctions” to connect it to “something much more dangerous”, and actually rendered invisible in the Western narrative: “the recent attempt to organize a coup d’etat in Belarus and the assassination of that country’s president.” Putin made sure to stress, “all boundaries have been crossed”.

The plot to kill Lukashenko was unveiled by Russian and Belarusian intel – which detained several actors backed, who else, US intel. The US State Department predictably denied any involvement.

Putin: “It is worth pointing to the confessions of the detained participants in the conspiracy that a blockade of Minsk was being prepared, including its city infrastructure and communications, the complete shutdown of the entire power grid of the Belarusian capital. This, incidentally means preparations for a massive cyber-attack.”

And that leads to a very uncomfortable truth: “Apparently, it’s not for no reason that our Western colleagues have stubbornly rejected numerous proposals by the Russian side to establish an international dialogue in the field of information and cyber-security.”

“Asymmetric, swift and harsh”
Putin remarked how to “attack Russia” has become “a sport, a new sport, who makes the loudest statements.” And then he went full Kipling: “Russia is attacked here and there for no reason. And of course, all sorts of petty Tabaquis [jackals] are running around like Tabaqui ran around Shere Khan [the tiger] – everything is like in Kipling’s book – howling along and ready to serve their sovereign. Kipling was a great writer”.

The – layered – metaphor is even more startling as it echoes the late 19th century geopolitical Great Game between the British and Russian empires, of which Kipling was a protagonist.

Once again Putin had to stress that “we really don’t want to burn any bridges. But if someone perceives our good intentions as indifference or weakness and intends to burn those bridges completely or even blow them up, he should know that Russia’s response will be asymmetric, swift and harsh”.

So here’s the new law of the geopolitical jungle – backed by Mr. Iskander, Mr. Kalibr, Mr. Avangard, Mr. Peresvet, Mr. Khinzal, Mr. Sarmat, Mr. Zircon and other well-respected gentlemen, hypersonic and otherwise, later complimented on the record. Those who poke the Bear to the point of threatening “the fundamental interests of our security will regret what has been done, as they have regretted nothing for a very long time.”

The stunning developments of the past few weeks – the China-US Alaska summit, the Lavrov-Wang Yi summit in Guilin, the NATO summit, the Iran-China strategic deal, Xi Jinping’s speech at the Boao forum – now coalesce into a stark new reality: the era of a unilateral Leviathan imposing its iron will is over.

For those Russophobes who still haven’t got the message, a cool, calm and collected Putin was compelled to add, “clearly, we have enough patience, responsibility, professionalism, self-confidence, self-assurance in the correctness of our position and common sense when it comes to making any decisions. But I hope that no one will think about crossing Russia’s so-called red lines. And where they run, we determine ourselves in each specific case.”

Back to realpolitik, Putin once again had to stress the “special responsibility” of the “five nuclear states” to seriously discuss “issues related to strategic armament”. It’s an open question whether the Biden-Harris administration – behind which stand a toxic cocktail of neo-cons and humanitarian imperialists – will agree.

Putin: “The goal of such negotiations could be to create an environment of conflict-free coexistence based on equal security, covering not only strategic weapons such as intercontinental ballistic missiles, heavy bombers and submarines, but also, I would like to emphasize, all offensive and defensive systems capable of solving strategic tasks, regardless of their equipment.”

As much as Xi’s address to the Boao forum was mostly directed to the Global South, Putin highlighted how “we are expanding contacts with our closest partners in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the BRICS, the Commonwealth of Independent States and the allies of the Collective Security Treaty Organization”, and extolled “joint projects in the framework of the Eurasian Economic Union”, billed as “practical tools for solving the problems of national development.”

In a nutshell: integration in effect, following the Russian concept of “Greater Eurasia”.
“Tensions skirting wartime levels”

Now compare all of the above with the White House Executive Order (EO) declaring a “national emergency” to “deal with the Russian threat”.

This is directly connected to President Biden – actually the combo telling him what to do, complete with earpiece and teleprompter – promising Ukraine’s President Zelensky that Washington would “take measures” to support Kiev’s wishful thinking of retaking Donbass and Crimea.

There are several eyebrow-raising issues with this EO. It denies, de facto, to any Russian national the full rights to their US property. Any US resident may be accused of being a Russian agent engaged in undermining US security. A sub-sub paragraph (C), detailing “actions or policies that undermine democratic processes or institutions in the United States or abroad”, is vague enough to be used to eliminate any journalism that supports Russia’s positions in international affairs.

Purchases of Russian OFZ bonds have been sanctioned, as well as one of the companies involved in the production of the Sputnik V vaccine. Yet the icing on this sanction cake may well be that from now on all Russian citizens, including dual citizens, may be barred from entering US territory except via a rare special authorization on top of the ordinary visa.

The Russian paper Vedomosti has noted that in such paranoid atmosphere the risks for large companies such as Yandex or Kaspersky Lab are significantly increasing. Still, these sanctions have not been met with surprise in Moscow. The worst is yet to come, according to Beltway insiders: two packages of sanctions against Nord Stream 2 already approved by the US Department of Justice.

The crucial point is that this EO de facto places anyone reporting on Russia’s political positions as potentially threatening “American democracy”. As top political analyst Alastair Crooke has remarked, this is a “procedure usually reserved for citizens of enemy states during times of war”. Crooke adds, “US hawks are upping the ante fiercely against Moscow. Tensions and rhetoric are skirting wartime levels.”

It’s an open question whether Putin’s State of the Nation will be seriously examined by the toxic lunatic combo of neocons and humanitarian imperialists bent on simultaneously harassing Russia and China.

But the fact is something extraordinary has already started to happen: a “de-escalation” of sorts.

Even before Putin’s address, Kiev, NATO and the Pentagon apparently got the message implicit in Russia moving two armies, massive artillery batteries and airborne divisions to the borders of Donbass and to Crimea – not to mention top naval assets moved from the Caspian to the Black Sea. NATO could not even dream of matching that.

Facts on different grounds speak volumes. Both Paris and Berlin were terrified of a possible Kiev clash directly against Russia, and lobbied furiously against it, bypassing the EU and NATO.

Then someone – it might have been Jake Sullivan – must have whispered on Crash Test Dummy’s earpiece that you don’t go around insulting the head of a nuclear state and expect to keep your global “credibility”. So after that by now famous “Biden” phone call to Putin came the invitation to the climate change summit, in which any lofty promises are largely rhetorical, as the Pentagon will continue to be the largest polluting entity on planet Earth.
So Washington may have found a way to keep at least one avenue of dialogue open with Moscow. At the same time Moscow has no illusions whatsoever that the Ukraine/Donbass/Crimea drama is over. Even if Putin did not mention it in the State of the Nation. And even if Defense Minister Shoigu has ordered a de-escalation.

The always inestimable Andrei Martyanov has gleefully noted the “cultural shock when Brussels and D.C. started to suspect that Russia doesn’t ‘want’ Ukraine. What Russia wants is for this country to rot and implode without excrement from this implosion hitting Russia. West’s paying for the clean up of this clusterf**k is also in Russian plans for Ukrainian Bantustan.”

The fact that Putin did not even mention Bantustan in his speech corroborates this analysis. As far as “red lines” are concerned, Putin’s implicit message remains the same: a NATO base on Russia’s western flank simply won’t be tolerated. Paris and Berlin know it. The EU is in denial. NATO will always refuse to admit it.

We always come back to the same crucial issue: whether Putin will be able, against all odds, to pull a combined Bismarck-Sun Tzu move and build a lasting German-Russian entente cordiale (and that’s quite far from an “alliance’). Nord Stream 2 is an essential cog in the wheel – and that’s what’s driving Washington hawks crazy.

Whatever happens next, for all practical purposes Iron Curtain 2.0 is now on, and it simply won’t go away. There will be more sanctions. Everything was thrown at the Bear short of a hot war. It will be immensely entertaining to watch how, and via which steps, Washington will engage on a “de-escalation and diplomatic process” with Russia.

The Hegemon may always find a way to deploy a massive P.R. campaign and ultimately claim a diplomatic success in “dissolving” the impasse. Well, that certainly beats a hot war. Otherwise, lowly Jungle Book adventurers have been advised: try anything funny and be ready to meet “asymmetric, swift and harsh”.
 
D

Dozdoats

On TB every waking moment
www.defenseone.com

US Nuclear Fears Are Shifting From a Clear Russian Threat to a Murkier Chinese One

Bejing might use nukes to coerce U.S. leaders in a crisis, STRATCOM chief tells lawmakers.
www.defenseone.com www.defenseone.com

US Nuclear Fears Are Shifting From a Clear Russian Threat to a Murkier Chinese One
Bejing might use nukes to coerce U.S. leaders in a crisis, STRATCOM chief tells lawmakers.
PATRICK TUCKER | APRIL 20, 2021

China is putting its nuclear forces on higher alert, yet the threat posed by Beijing’s arsenal is not well understood by the United States or its allies, the head of U.S. Strategic Command testified on Tuesday.

“I can’t get through a week without finding out something I didn’t know about China,” Adm. Charles Richard, the head of U.S. Strategic Command, told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday.

Richard said China’s “very opaque” nuclear policy makes it “difficult to determine their intentions.”

But evidence suggests that China is moving toward a higher state of alert, he said in his written testimony.

“While China keeps the majority of its forces in a peacetime status, increasing evidence suggests China has moved a portion of its nuclear force to a Launch on Warning (LOW) posture and are adopting a limited ‘high alert duty’ strategy,” he wrote.

Beijing is buying new satellites to detect enemy launches and new command-and-control systems for its own forces, he wrote.

“Their networked and integrated platform advancements will enable skip-echelon decision-making processes and greater rapid reaction,” he wrote.

Richard faced some questions on the cost of U.S. plans to replace its nuclear ICBMs, submarines, and bombers — in particular the $95 billion DoD officials say they need to replace Minuteman III missiles with the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent.

Richard said that the United States is well behind both China and Russia in modernizing its nuclear forces. With new delivery systems and exercising on a level “not seen since the Cold War,” he said that Russia was about 80 percent done modernizing its nuclear force.

But the majority of the questions Richards took related to the Chinese threat. China has 350 or so nukes, less than one-tenth the active U.S. inventory of around 3,800. But he said that both China and Russia “have significant capability…to produce more warheads,” a capability that the United States does not possess.

He said that’s why China’s mysterious doctrine is so concerning and why the sort of deterrence strategies that the United States pursued during the Cold War no longer work. China, he said, could “use those capabilities coercively in a way that would limit our decision space in crisis. Additionally, it will rip out the underpinnings by which the rest of our forces are employed. We would not be able to deter China from escalating right past us if the stakes were high enough in a crisis or conflict.”
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3


Everyone is talking about Russia pulling back its troops and some armor back but what people are not talking about is that Ukraine didn't pull anything back and are in fact still moving tanks and armor closer to the line of contact.
Remember President Z of Ukraine signed the orders to reintegrate Crimea and Eastern Ukraine back into Ukraine. He wouldn't have done this without U.S. permission. So shit is still afoot.
________________________________
TexIntel
@Tex_Intel

Replying to
@EndGameWW3
Remember this conflict will stay local as long as NATO doesn't perceive an immediate threat to there european borders.

EndGameWW3
@EndGameWW3
It will with the Russian back separatist, its after that line of defense shit gets sketchy with Russia
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
csis.org

Unpacking the Russian Troop Buildup along Ukraine’s Border
Associate Fellow, Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program

7-9 minutes


On March 31, U.S. European Command raised its awareness level to “potential imminent crisis” in response to estimates that over 100,000 Russian troops had been positioned along its border with Ukraine and within Crimea, in addition to its naval forces in the Sea of Azov. This deployment, representing the highest force mobilization since Russia’s annexation of Crimea and military incursion into Eastern Ukraine in 2014, came on the heels of a sharp escalation in fighting along the line of control separating Ukrainian forces from Russian-backed separatists in Donbas in March. Ukraine has been under extraordinary pressure in light of the scale and scope of this mobilization.

On April 13, Russian minister of defense Sergei Shoigu stated that this mobilization constituted a “response to threatening activities” by NATO. However, NATO has not significantly shifted its forces other than to continue preparations for a previously notified multistage annual exercise, DEFENDER-21, which involves approximately 30,000 forces from 27 nations and began in March.

On April 22, the Russian government appeared to turn down the heat on these deployments, with Minister Shoigu announcing a drawdown of the exercise and ordering troops to return to their permanent bases by May 1, to include the 58th Army of the Southern Military District, the 41st Army of the Central Military District, as well as the 7th and 76th Airborne Assault and 98th Airborne divisions, according to the statement. Importantly, the equipment and weapons of the 41st Army are to remain at Pogonovo, a military training ground 17 kilometers south of Voronezh. According to Shoigu, they will be used in Russia’s annual Zapad exercises in Western Russia and Belarus in September. Moreover, all troops should remain “in a state of readiness for an immediate response in case of the unfavourable development,” he said, referring to NATO’s DEFENDER-21 exercises.
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%202%20MOBILE.jpg?iAJuVVzZKqZlXl.ryBrssJTelxlJ8HDM
Russia’s thermostat (de)mobilization—turning the heat up dramatically and then abruptly lowering it—has kept NATO and Ukraine, tense and off-balance. The military “exercises”, allegedly involving two armies and three paratrooper divisions, are worth unpacking.

Satellite images of the Pogonovo training facility captured on April 10 shed light on the scale of the deployment and nature of military equipment involved. The images show two motorized rifle brigades and additional, likely division-level elements, including a field hospital, troop housing, and several unidentified troop deployments. Additional imagery indicates that the units arrived sometime between March 24 and April 9, marking a relatively rapid deployment and setup.

Identified within the cantonments of the two motorized rifle brigades were tank and rifle battalions and multiple rocket launcher (MRL), air defense, and short-range ballistic missile (SRBM) batteries. One of the two cantonments also included probable engineering and chemical defense companies. To the east of the two brigades is an unidentified troop deployment under tarps and netting, which may serve as a headquarters.
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%204%20MOBILE.jpg?F50Ypn6q6Zx6h0SqkFqMgiNHHrVYen22
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%206%20MOBILE.jpg?1SEZu1P4JSn4C7pa.NjLECmb9HkZISv8
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%207%20MOBILE.jpg?O6vSaUzHpzlifbwU6ULBXIuTjMRwKAW9
Close-ups of the military assets at Pogonovo training facility. Click to expand.

Though nominally a readiness check, the scale of the mobilization to Pogonovo and Crimea raised fears that Russia was planning a more permanent staging presence along the border with Ukraine and a possible escalation. Russian forces deployed for over five weeks—much longer than Russia’s largest annual training exercises. While Russia does occasionally exercise long-distance deployments of troops and equipment from distant military districts, April’s mobilization has no recent parallel.

The announced drawdown indicates a significant deescalation. However, until Russian troops actually leave Pogonovo, the situation will remain tense. The nature of their deployment observed in satellite imagery does not clearly indicate offensive or defensive postures, but rather one of readiness. Available images show the units can move out of their current cantonments with relative ease and speed to conduct either offensive or defensive operations with the currently deployed units and supplies. Extended operations appear unlikely, as they would require additional logistic support from division, corps, or army level.

We estimate that either of the motorized rifle brigades in the imagery would need to be resupplied after only moderate travel every three to seven days with no combat. In combat, and depending upon intensity, the same motorized rifle brigade could require resupply every one to two days.

While observers have offered a variety of possible explanations for Russia’s motives, Pogonovo’s buildup and its more northernly location forced Ukraine and the West to grapple with the most pessimistic scenario: that Russia could launch a broader offensive on Ukraine not contained to the existing line of control to the south. The base is 250 kilometers northeast of Ukraine-controlled territory in Luhansk region, but over 400 kilometers from the northernmost tip of the separatist-controlled Lugansk People’s Republic in Ukraine, creating greater offensive optionality for Moscow.

Some have argued that Russian “exercises” could be designed to conceal the movement of troops and supplies into separatist-controlled Donbas as part of a calculated but deniable escalation by Moscow, but Pogonovo is an unlikely staging site for such an operation, raising the specter of an attack on Ukraine-controlled Luhansk.
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%208%20MOBILE.jpg?tfhaIhpDximU0ZXJy54NJPS1mAPMx7eX
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%209%20MOBILE.jpg?GZA__O15yDV3vCKRi8xx1zG3caGEqclj
https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/HighResSpotlight_PogonovoTrainingFacility_Slide%2010%20MOBILE.jpg?CrAb34PM22pdGge2nQt6.lLV27.yuH17
Additional close-ups of the Pogonovo training facility. Click to expand.

The April 10 images make clear that there are presently enough Russian troops to credibly threaten Ukraine. The planned departure of troops from Crimea and Pogonovo would change this dynamic. However, the decision to keep a significant arsenal in Pogonovo through the summer suggests Russia’s final force posture along Ukraine’s border remains unsettled. The time required for Russian troops to redeploy to the camp and take up an offensive posture will be significantly reduced.

Although Washington aspires to a more “stable, predictable” relationship with Moscow, the military buildup in and around Ukraine has undermined this goal. The announced troop drawdown is a welcome step towards stability, but for now, the situation remains unpredictable.

Special thanks to Jennifer Jun for her research support. Imagery markups by William Taylor.
Cyrus Newlin is an associate fellow with the Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, D.C. Heather Conley is senior vice president for Europe, Eurasia, and the Arctic and director of the CSIS Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program. Matthew P. Funaiole is a senior fellow for data analysis with the iDeas Lab and senior fellow with the China Power Project at CSIS. Joseph S. Bermudez, Jr., is a senior fellow for imagery analysis (non-resident) with the CSIS iDeas Lab and Korea Chair.
Commentary is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).
© 2021 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Posted for fair use
www.csis.org

Unpacking the Russian Troop Buildup along Ukraine’s Border

Russia has announced a partial drawdown. Satellite imagery shows what equipment will remain on Ukraine’s border.
www.csis.org www.csis.org
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
Zelensky instructs chief of staff to arrange meeting with Putin
14:50, 26.04.21
Politics 1 min.

Earlier, Putin offered to meet in Moscow.
Zelensky instructs chief of staff to arrange meeting with Putin / Photo from UNIAN

Zelensky instructs chief of staff to arrange meeting with Putin / Photo from UNIAN
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has instructed Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine Andriy Yermak to arrange a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
"I indeed offered to meet in Donbas. The president of the Russian Federation confirmed his wish to meet, but in Moscow. I have instructed the head of the Office of the President to contact the Putin administration so that they could come to an agreement, find a venue or city where we could meet," Zelensky said during a trip to the Chornobyl nuclear power plant on April 26.
Click to expand...
Read alsoZelensky offers to involve U.S., UK, Canada in Normandy talks Zelensky offers to involve U.S., UK, Canada in Normandy talks Possible Zelensky-Putin meeting
  • In a televised address on April 20, 2021, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky invited his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, to hold talks in Donbas.
  • On April 22, 2021, Putin responded to the invitation by suggesting that Zelensky could discuss the Donbas issue with the "leaders" of the two self-proclaimed republics, the "LPR/DPR," adding that Moscow remained open for contact on any other issues.
  • Ukraine's Ambassador to Israel Yevhen Korniychuk said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was looking into the offer to broker the talks between Zelensky and Putin.
  • First President of independent Ukraine, Head of the Ukrainian delegation to the Trilateral Contact Group on Donbas Leonid Kravchuk believes the presidents of Ukraine and Russia, Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin, should meet on the territory of a neutral country. It could be Finland or Switzerland, Kravchuk suggested.

Read more on UNIAN: Zelensky instructs chief of staff to arrange meeting with Putin
Posted for fair use
www.unian.info

Zelensky instructs chief of staff to arrange meeting with Putin

Earlier, Putin offered to meet in Moscow.
www.unian.info www.unian.info
 
jward

jward

passin' thru
U.S. Global Hawk Drone "Lost Contact" While Flying Over Ukraine: Russian Media
  • Our Bureau
  • 05:36 AM, April 26, 2021
  • 1823


U.S. Global Hawk Drone

RQ-4 Global Hawk
One of the two U.S. RQ-4 Global Hawk drones conducting reconnaissance near Russian borders reported loss of communication and made a sharp turn to return, while it was flying close to Belgorod Oblast, recently.
The alleged incident is said to have taken place on April 24. The aircraft took off from Sigonella Air Force Base in Italy and headed towards Ukraine’s Kharkiv. They were conducting reconnaissance near Russian borders and Crimea, unconfirmed Russian media reports say.

Read: Oil Leak, Defective Parts in South Korean RQ-4 Global Hawk Drones
There is no mention of the incident by official U.S. sources.
The reports speculated that the drone may have suffered a technical issue or could have been jammed by Russian electronic warfare systems.
At the said airbase, NATO’s RQ-4D drones are housed. These Alliance Ground Surveillance (AGS) aircraft achieved initial operational capability in February 2021.

On April 22, Defence Blog reported citing U.S. officials that Russia was trying to find a way to jam and block signals from U.S. Air Force RQ-4 Global Hawks. Pentagon reconnaissance aircraft, including RQ-4s, had been making regular day-to-day appearances, up to two or even three times daily, at Russia’s borders. U.S. military intelligence had been snooping on almost all Russian military facilities on the Black Sea, in Crimea, and eastern Ukraine.
The report said that Russia was using its latest ground-based and air-based EW systems to jam drones to thwart U.S.’ intelligence activities. Russia’s EW capability has used to disturb a radio signal of the global navigation system and to jam signals from drones
www.defenseworld.net

U.S. Global Hawk Drone “Lost Contact” While Flying Over Ukraine: Russian Media

One of the two U.S. RQ-4 Global Hawk drones conducting reconnaissance near Russian borders reported loss of communication and made a sharp turn to return, while it was flying close to Belgorod Oblast, recently. The alleged incident is said to have taken place on April 24. The aircraft took off...
www.defenseworld.net www.defenseworld.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top