Tag: FT

Britain stokes fear over ‘mysterious object’

Britain has warned that a “mysterious object was launched by the Russian military”.

The FT’s Sam Jones, Defence and Security Editor, reported that the Object 2014-28E is being tracked by western space agencies, “stoking fears over the revival of a defunct Kremlin project to destroy satellites”.

Jones, who specialises in anti-Russian propaganda, has numerous sources inside MI6.

 

For the past few weeks, amateur astronomers and satellite-trackers in Russia and the west have followed the unusual manoeuvres of Object 2014-28E, watching it guide itself towards other Russian space objects. The pattern appeared to culminate last weekend in a rendezvous with the remains of the rocket stage that launched it.

The object had originally been classed as space debris, propelled into orbit as part of a Russian rocket launch in May to add three Rodnik communications satellites to an existing military constellation. The US military is now tracking it under the Norad designation 39765.

Its purpose is unknown, and could be civilian: a project to hoover up space junk, for example. Or a vehicle to repair or refuel existing satellites. But interest has been piqued because Russia did not declare its launch – and by the object’s peculiar, and very active, precision movements across the skies.

Russia officially mothballed its anti-satellite weaponry programme – Istrebitel Sputnikov or satellite killer – after the fall of the iron curtain, though its expertise has not entirely disappeared. Indeed, military officials have publicly stated in the past that they would restart research in the event of a deterioration in relations with the US over anti-missile defence treaties. In 2010, Oleg Ostapenko, commander of Russia’s space forces, and now head of its space agency, said Russia was again developing “inspection” and “strike” satellites.

Moscow’s ministry of defence did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“Whatever it is, [Object 2014-28E] looks experimental,” said Patricia Lewis, research director at think-tank Chatham House and an expert in space security. “It could have a number of functions, some civilian and some military. One possibility is for some kind of grabber bar. Another would be kinetic pellets which shoot out at another satellite. Or possibly there could be a satellite-to-satellite cyber attack or jamming.”

In a week when the European Space Agency’s Rosetta spacecraft landed a probe on a comet, the peregrinations of 2014-28E could seem insignificant, but they highlight an area of growing – if so far little publicised – concern for defence strategists: the weaponisation of space.

Having the ability to destroy or degrade an opponent’s satellite communications has been regarded as a powerful military capability since the space race began but, after the collapse of the iron curtain, many of the secret research projects Soviet and US engineers were working on were quietly shelved. In the past few years, however, interest in space weapons has revived.

“It would be odd if space were to remain the one area that [militaries] don’t get their hands on,” says Ms Lewis. Cyber attacks on satellites are already a reality, she points out: last week, hackers linked to the Chinese government infiltrated US federal weather satellites.

Russia has in the past been at the forefront of efforts to try to secure an international treaty to prevent weapons being deployed in space, but its efforts have fallen on stony ground.

Amid rapid advances by other foreign powers, and the recent deterioration in relations between Moscow and the west, plans to revive the IS programme would make strategic sense, said one Russian military expert.

As far back as 2007, the Chinese showed they had the ability to shoot down satellites with rockets and in 2008 the US demonstrated it had the same capability.

More recently, in May this year, a Chinese satellite known as Shijian 15 began to exhibit unusual propulsion capabilities and eventually intercepted another Chinese satellite, Shijian 7.

“The experiment was linked to the possible use of a remote capture arm and close proximity operations,” said Max White, a member of the Kettering group of astronomers, which made a name for itself in the 1960s by pinpointing the location of Soviet spy satellite launches. “Both can have peaceful as well as military nuances, with the former for refuelling in space, and the latter for disabling an active payload belonging to a foreign nation, potentially without causing a debris cloud.

“Whether the Russians feel they need to demonstrate such capability is a matter for debate,” Mr White added. He, too, has been following the activities of object 2014-28E.

In a signal of international sensitivities over the prospect of anti-satellite technologies being rapidly developed, a Chinese missile test this year drew an unusually fiery response from the Pentagon. US authorities said they had “high confidence” that a July launch was a test for a ground-based weapon to strike a satellite, accusing the Chinese of “destabilising actions”. China’s test was later also condemned by the EU.

Russia will start deploying its own orbital space station in 2017, using part of the modules constructed for the International Space Station (ISS), Kommersant newspaper reported Monday, citing a space engineering source.

“The new station will be located geometrically more advantageous, allowing an extended field of view of the Earth’s surface. As much as 90 percent of Russia’s territory and the Arctic offshore area will be visible from the station,” the source said, noting that the ISS’ field of view covers no more than 5 percent of the region.

In May, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin announced that Moscow was not planning to use the International Space Station after 2020 and would instead re-focus its funding on more promising new space projects.

Malema targets big spenders says FT

MalemaFTThe Financial Times carried this story titled: Malema targets big game in ANC’s heartland on the front page:

Sitting in a plush lodge on the edge of Kruger National Park, the self-styled

revolutionary and spokesman for South Africa’s dispossessed outlines calmly his plans to expropriate land from white farmers, and nationalise banks and mines in Africa’s largest economy.

“We are worse than the way we were during apartheid,” he tells the Financial Times during a 90 minute interview. “The only thing that has changed is the government of white people has been replaced with a government of black people.”

The stout, boyish-looking 33-year-old, dressed in black tracksuit and black trainers, is a highly divisive figure. To critics, including many businesspeople, he is an opportunistic rabble-rouser tainted by corruption allegations. To supporters, he is a rare voice speaking to the divisions enduring in one of the world’s more unequal societies despite strides taken since the end of white rule.

Campaigning to the left of the ruling African National Congress he aspires to steal votes from the ruling party’s heartland, the rural and urban black poor, in elections on May 7. They are widely expected to be the most closely contested since the end of apartheid 20 years ago.

Mr Malema described president Jacob Zuma – the man he helped propel to the country’s top job – as a “monster”, and denounced the ANC’s 20-year record in power. He formally launched his Economic Freedom Fighters in October after being expelled from the ANC – where he led the militant youth league – for indiscipline in 2012.

He makes the point that while under the ANC more black people may have gained access to water and electricity, the water is often not clean and the electricity connection does not guarantee power. “So you are actually in more pain because these things are closer to you and, close as they are, you cannot use them,” he says.

This message resonates with the frustrated black majority in a country where youth unemployment is at least 50 per cent, and almost 40 per cent of the population live below the poverty line. It also carries weight with blacks of all classes who believe they are still economically marginalised in a country where the corporate world remains predominantly in white hands.

The challenge for Mr Malema is to turn disgruntlement into votes and survive court cases that could derail his career.

The politician, whose penchant for designer watches has come to symbolise his perceived opulent lifestyle, has had his properties auctioned off as the revenue authority has pursued him for R16m ($1.5m) in outstanding taxes. He is fighting a sequestration order and says he is willing to make a revised offer to resolve the matter.

Mr Malema has courted controversy in the past by saluting President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe but he says the EFF would not follow the path of Zimbabwe, where the forced and often violent seizure of white-owned land triggered a collapse of the economy.

But he says he wants government to be the custodian of land that grants licences to users and insists the state should control 60 per cent of mines.

“Foreign investors who are prepared to share with South Africans are more than welcome,” he says. “But if it is about individualism and maximisation of profit to the exclusion of indigenous people, such a foreign investor will not be entertained.”

Mr Malema and the EFF have brought a new dimension to the country’s political landscape. Pallo Jordan, an ANC intellectual, has said the ANC “might opt for more radical policies” if it faces an effective challenge from the left, “realigning South African politics in directions that few will have anticipated”.

The other threat to the ANC comes from the Democratic Alliance, the main opposition party. But it is still viewed by many – fairly or not – as a largely white party.

Yet for all his outward confidence Mr Malema acknowledges the campaign against the well-oiled ANC election machinery is a difficult one. And touting his radical policies can be a hindrance when seeking financial backers.

“It is a very difficult campaign in that we do not have resources and our policies are such that those who own resources will never finance us,” Mr Malema says. “Elections are very expensive things in South Africa, but if we had resources we would remove the ANC from power tomorrow.”

Source: FT. By Lionel Barber, Andrew England & Javier Blas