Electromagnetic Pulse

by Bobby Akart

  Russia’s new airborne command center is primarily designed to have high survivability and reliability in case of a nuclear war. The Ilyushin Il-80’s technical capabilities include managing communication networks of Russia’s land forces, navy, air, and space forces, as well as their Strategic Missile Forces.

  The Ilyushin Il-80 aircraft is meant to be used as an airborne command center for Russian officials, especially President Vladimir Putin, in the event of nuclear war. According to analysts, the aircraft has no external windows, effectively shielding it from a nuclear blast or a high-altitude nuclear electromagnetic pulse. There is only one exterior door, instead of three, and it has a baffle blocking the aft cockpit window, to prevent EMP or RF pulse intrusions during a nuclear attack.

  The second-generation command center aboard the aircraft is capable of being operational even when ground-based infrastructure and ground-based command centers have been destroyed. In essence, the Russian Defense Ministry has a fully functional, aerial strategic command post. Ironically, the announcement by the Russian Ministry of Defense came one day after Democrat Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, from Hawaii, warned President Barack Obama of an impending nuclear war with Russia.

  Russia’s anti-satellite missile development – Space Wars?

  Russia carried out the first successful flight test of a new anti-satellite missile in 2015, marking a new phase in the global militarization of space. The flight test of Russia’s direct ascent, anti-satellite missile, known as Nudol, was successful following three prior failures, according to defense officials who were familiar with reports of the test. With the successful anti-satellite missile test, Russia has joined China in arming its forces with strategic space warfare weaponry. Twenty days earlier, China had conducted a flight test of its anti-satellite missile—the Dong Neng-3, another direct ascent missile.

  Following these reports, a Pentagon spokesman indicated that both Russia and China are developing space warfare capabilities that could threaten critical U.S. satellites. Little information is available on the secretive Russian program. However, like China’s recent technological advancements, the Russian direct ascent missile appears to be linked to its missile defense programs.

  According to the Russian state-run press, Novosti, reports have identified the mobile transporter-launcher for what is described as, “a new Russian long-range missile defense and space defense intercept complex.” In response, U.S. General John E. Hyten, the Space Command commander, said he does not want to see conflict extend to space, but also noted we have to be able to defend ourselves. Hyten stated that several nations, including Russia, North Korea, China, and Iran are developing anti-satellite capabilities.

  Analysts agree that the space threat to satellites highlights a strategic vulnerability. With as few as two dozen anti-satellite missiles containing EMP warheads, Russia or China could cripple U.S. intelligence, navigation, and communications capabilities that are critical for both military operations and civilian infrastructure.

  As Washington cuts our defense budget, the Russians continue to develop their technological abilities to weaponize space and to take out our nation’s technology advantage. One Congressman responded to the report, saying, “We can foolishly turn a blind eye to these developments, or acknowledge this threat and develop our capabilities to ensure that our satellites—military and commercial—are not susceptible to attack or blackmail.”

  China has conducted several tests of anti-satellite weapons, including a 2007 test that left tens of thousands of pieces of dangerous debris floating in space. The space junk continues to threaten both manned and unmanned satellites. In 2015, a polar-orbiting National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration satellite, NOAA 16, mysteriously broke up in space, according to the Air Force’s Joint Space Operations Center. An Air Force Space Command spokesman said no satellites or other objects were detected near the NOAA 16 before its disintegration.

  NORTH KOREA

  Other nations may not be that far behind Russia and China in the development of EMP weaponry. North Korea has acquired the technology to build an EMP warhead, quite possibly from the Iranians or the Chinese. North Korea routinely test launches satellites that could evade US early warning radars. If these satellites had the ability to launch a nuclear warhead, they would be at the optimal altitude needed to generate a devastating electromagnetic pulse across the entire continental U.S.

  North Korea has demonstrated a Fractional Orbital Bombardment System or FOBS capability. FOBS was developed by the Soviet Union in the late sixties to attack the U.S. from over the South Pole, in contrast to their ICBMs that were designed to be launched over the North Pole. Sources within DHS find that North Korea could use its Unha-3 space launch vehicle to deliver a nuclear warhead from a satellite flying over the South Pole.

  A HEMP attack on the U.S. would not have to originate from North Korea but could be a missile, such as the SA-2, launched from a freighter off the Eastern Seaboard, or our Gulf Coast. The U.S. has limited missile defense capabilities in these areas of the country. The mutually assured destruction doctrine may not necessarily apply, simply because a missile launched from a freighter could be difficult to identify.

  The U.S. anti-missile nuclear defense system that was established to defend against a North Korean missile attack, is plagued with serious technical flaws in the anti-missile interceptors in the U.S. defense system that make it inadequate, according to analysts. Furthermore, even if the technical problems were resolved, a North Korean satellite could potentially come over the undefended South Pole and detonate a HEMP, causing an electromagnetic pulse event for which the U.S. would be virtually defenseless.

  Even before the recent revelation that there are defects in the interceptors, experts have warned the U.S. that the anti-ballistic missile system is inadequate because of the limited number of defense systems positioned to intercept an attack from our southern coast. Anti-missile defense systems on the East Coast similarly remain inadequate, with virtually no missile sites located in the southern United States.

  In early January of 2016, North Korea claimed that it had successfully tested a miniaturized hydrogen bomb.

  The announcement was made by a state-controlled television anchor who read a statement calling the test a perfect success. Reports from North Korea claimed the testing elevated the country's nuclear might to the next level and provided it with a weapon to defend itself against the United States and other enemies.

  However, Andrei Lankov, a North Korea expert based in Seoul, South Korea, was seriously skeptical that Pyongyang had tested a hydrogen bomb. According to Lankov, North Korea would have needed to divert a large amount of scarce funds to construct such a device, saying it would have been mission overkill.

  "I believe it did not have the 'signature' of a Hydrogen bomb," said Lankov, who added that he had "absolutely no doubt" that the blast was an atomic test, the fourth carried out since 2006 in defiance of international and United Nations sanctions.

  Further, South Korean lawmaker Lee Cheol Woo, told the Associated Press that the country's National Intelligence Service had expressed, in a private briefing, that they believed North Korea had tested an atomic bomb, not a hydrogen bomb.

  According to Woo, South Korean intelligence officials said that an estimated explosive yield of six kilotons and a magnitude-4.8 earthquake was detected on the day in question. A smaller blast than the estimated explosive yield of 7.9 kilotons and magnitude-4.9 quake that was reported after a February 2013 nuclear test by North Korea, and only a fraction of a typical successful hydrogen bomb test's explosive yield of hundreds of kilotons. A hydrogen bomb detonation typically yields tens of kilotons.

  The U.K. also reacted with outrage. "If a nuclear device has been detonated by North Korea, this is a grave breach of UN Security Council resolutions and a provocation which I condemn without reservation," British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said in a statement. "It underlines the very real threat that North Korea represents to regional and int
ernational security."

  North Korea goes to great lengths to conceal its tests by conducting them underground and tightly sealing off tunnels or any other vents though which radioactive residue and blast-related noble gases could escape into the atmosphere. The U.S. Air Force has aircraft designed to detect the evidence of a nuclear test, and such aircraft could be deployed from a U.S. base on the Japanese island of Okinawa to search for clues. Japanese media said Tokyo has also mobilized its own reconnaissance aircraft for sorties over the Sea of Japan to try to collect atmospheric data.

  In Washington, State Department spokesman John Kirby warned, "we condemn any violation of U.N. Security Council Resolutions and again call on North Korea to abide by its international obligations and commitments," later adding, "we have consistently made clear, that we will not accept [North Korea] as a nuclear state."

  Washington and nuclear experts have been skeptical about past North Korean claims to Hydrogen bombs, which are more powerful, and significantly more difficult to make than atomic bombs. North Korea's fourth nuclear explosion will likely push Pyongyang's scientists and engineers closer to their goal of building a high-altitude EMP bomb small enough to place on a missile that can reach the U.S. mainland.

  A successful hydrogen bomb test would be a big new step for North Korea. Fusion is the main principle behind the hydrogen bomb, which can be hundreds of times more powerful than atomic bombs that use fission. In a hydrogen bomb, radiation from a nuclear fission explosion sets off a fusion reaction that is responsible for a powerful blast and radioactivity.

  Prior to this test, analysts said North Korea hadn't achieved the technology needed to manufacture a miniaturized warhead that could fit on a long-range missile capable of hitting the U.S. mainland. But there is a growing debate on just how far North Korea has advanced in its secretive nuclear and missile programs. Analysts uniformly agree that a missile could be launched from the Gulf of Mexico or via one of North Korea's orbiting satellites.

  In late 2015, Kim Jong Un said that his country was, "ready to detonate a self-reliant A-bomb and H-bomb to reliably defend its sovereignty and the dignity of the nation." The comments were met with skepticism by North Korea watchers, who said it was unlikely that Pyongyang possessed the technology to develop such a weapon. These skeptics appear to be convinced.

  But nuclear expert, Jeffrey Lewis, wrote on the North Korea-focused 38 North website, "The North has now had a nuclear weapons program for more than 20 years. This program has yielded three nuclear tests. North Korean nuclear scientists have access to their counterparts in Pakistan, possibly Iran and maybe a few other places. We should not expect that they will test the same fission device over and over again."

  North Korea's previous nuclear test was in early 2013, and Kim Jong Un did not mention nuclear weapons in his annual New Year's speech. Some outside analysts speculated the dictator was worried about deteriorating ties with China, North Korea's last major ally, which has shown greater frustration at provocations and a possible willingness to allow stronger U.N. sanctions.

  IRAN

  In early 2015, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani endorsed the use of a nuclear EMP attack against the United States. This revelation came just months before the Obama Administration moved to lift restrictions on the Iranian nuclear program. Clearly, Iran could threaten the existence of the United States by initiating an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack using a single nuclear weapon. A nuclear Iran could destroy the most powerful nation on Earth.

  Death to America is more than merely an Iranian chant — Tehran’s military, has sought the capability to initiate a nuclear EMP attack for years.

  In the summer of 2015, at the annual meeting of the Electric Infrastructure Security Summit in Washington, Congressman Trent Franks quoted from an Iranian military textbook titled Passive Defense. In it, the impact of a high altitude nuclear EMP is described in detail. It advocates the use of an EMP attack to defeat an adversary.

  The official Iranian military textbook promotes the next generation of warfare that combines coordinated attacks by nuclear and non-nuclear EMP weapons, including cyber warfare. Their stated objective is to destroy electric grids, and collapse entire nations. Iranian military doctrine makes no distinction between nuclear EMP weapons, non-nuclear radio-frequency weapons, and cyber-operations, although it regards nuclear EMP attacks as the ultimate cyber-weapon. In Passive Defense, the Iranians advocate EMP as most effective at disabling critical infrastructures without directly causing damage to human life. It provides, in part:

  “As a result of not having the other destructive effects that nuclear weapons possess, among them the loss of human life, weapons derived from electromagnetic pulses have attracted attention with regard to their use in future wars. The superficiality of secondary damage sustained, as well as the avoidance of human casualties, serves as a motivation to transform this technology into an advanced and useful weapon in modern warfare.”

  Because EMP destroys electronics directly, but people indirectly, it is regarded by some as an acceptable use of a nuclear weapon under Sharia Law. Passive Defense and other Iranian military treatises seem to ignore the fact that a high-altitude nuclear EMP attack will result in an incredible loss of human life due to the accompanying societal and economic collapse. One Iranian scholar wrote:

  “If the world’s industrial countries fail to devise effective ways to defend themselves against dangerous electronic assaults, then they will disintegrate within a few years. American soldiers would not be able to find food to eat, nor would they be able to fire a single shot.”

  The Iranians have done more than just think about an EMP attack.

  The Congressional EMP Commission, summarized in Exhibit C, found that Iran has practiced launching missiles and fusing warheads for a HEMP attack, including off a freighter. Iran has apparently practiced surprise EMP attacks utilizing orbiting satellites on south polar trajectories to evade U.S. radars and missile defenses, at altitudes consistent with generating an EMP field covering the continental U.S. Iran launched its fourth satellite on such a path as recently as February 2015.

  Through an interpretation of Passive Defense, and other Iranian documents, it is clear the Iranians are unconcerned with the deterrent effect of the Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine. They recognize that a single nuclear weapon would complete the list of requirements. Further, because a properly planned, nuclear EMP attack can be conducted by surprise and with anonymity — deterrence may not work against EMP. Deterrence depends on knowing who attacked, and possessing the ability to retaliate. Unlike a nuclear weapon used to blast a city, a high-altitude EMP leaves no collectible bomb debris for forensic analysis to identify the aggressor.

  An EMP attack by missile or balloon launched off a freighter could be from many possible actors. Even Yemen’s Houthis have Scud missiles, and know how to use them, having recently killed the Chief of Saudi Arabia’s air force with a Scud strike on King Khalid Air Force Base.

  Hundreds of satellites are in low earth orbit, unseen when approaching the U.S. from the south, which could help disguise the origins of an EMP attack. Also, the EMP could damage not only the means necessary to identify the attacker, but U.S. retaliatory capabilities.

  Ayatollah warned that the U.S. deserved a punch in the mouth

  One Iranian nuclear weapon is one too many for an Iran ruled by theocratic totalitarian, genocidal imperialists. The spiritual leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has warned the U.S. to stay out of his country's affairs and in particular, its nuclear program, which has resumed in late 2015. Speaking on a tour of southeast Iran, Khamenei commented that the US deserved a punch in the mouth. Khamenei offered up some additional, more specific harsh words to America. "America is evil and rude. They need to be punched in the mouth," stated Ali Khamenei. "By punched in the mouth, I mean that we need to continue to enrich uranium, build nuclear weapons, get them in the hands of as many terrorists as we can and assist them in detonating them in the northeastern Unite
d States.”

  In response, as Iranians celebrate Ashura, a bloodied Shia Muslim rite, chants of We shall give our blood for you, Oh Khamenei, were heard.

  Khamenei said that it was not up to the U.S. to decide which countries needed nuclear technology. There is increasing concern within Congress over Iran's missile program, which has been determined by a commission of U.S. scientists, to pose a serious threat to U.S. security.

  ISIS, ISIL, Islamic State of DAESH

  Let’s address what to call this terrorist group first.

  ISIS: The militant group, which began as the Iraqi branch of al Qaeda during the U.S. occupation of Iraq, gained this name after it invaded Syria in 2013. ISIS is short for "Islamic State in Iraq and Syria," or "Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham," which is an old Arabic term for the area.

  ISIL: ISIL translates to “the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.” The Levant is a geographical term that refers to the eastern shore of the Mediterranean -- Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, Israel and Jordan. It’s the term that the U.S. government uses, stating, "Levant" is a better translation for al-Sham, the Arabic name for the region. But it is also true that The Levant, includes the land bridge between Turkey to the north and Egypt to the south. By Arabic tradition and definition, The Levant includes Israel. Some scholars, therefore argue that by referring to this terrorist group as ISIL, one is acknowledging that the Nation of Israel does not exist.

  Islamic State: This is the English version of what the terror group calls itself. It also claims to be a caliphate, which is a state ruled by a caliph—Arabic for successor,, meaning successor to the Islamic Prophet Muhammad. The last acknowledged Muslim caliphate was the Ottoman Empire, which ended in 1923. Many governments and media refuse to use this name because it gives the group legitimacy as a state and a representative of Islam.

  Daesh: This is a term the militant group hates. French President François Hollande has used it after Paris attacks in 2015. It’s an Arabic acronym for, “al-Dawla al-Islamiya fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham.” It can sometimes be spelled DAIISH, Da'esh, or Daech, a popular French version. The hacktivist group, Anonymous, and President Barack Obama have used the term since the deadly terrorist attacks in Paris. ISIS threatened “to cut out the tongue of anyone who publicly used the acronym Daesh, instead of referring to the group by its full name,” the Associated Press wrote in September 2014.