"A date which will live in infamy"
On the early morning of Sunday, December 7, 1941, the sneak attack of Pearl Harbor was intended as a preventive action in order to keep the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with military actions the Empire of Japan was planning in Southeast Asia against overseas territories of the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and the United States.The attack was an initial shock to all the Allies in the Pacific Theater. Further losses compounded the alarming setback.
A “day of infamy” becomes a reality for U.S. and NATO’s military. ?
In 2015, could another Pearl Harbor sneak attack upon the U.S.’s space-based military digital hybrid networks by Asymmetric Warfare and/or anti-satellite attack ever happen? The consequence could be the end of Western civilization as we know it. Will the Obama Administration’s rapid cutting the U.S. Military allow America to respond to space attacks? What military contingencies would be available to prevent a complete electronic global sneak attack upon the U.S., NATO Allies, and Defense Coalition digital space-based military defense digital IP architecture? Al Qaeda’s Allies, the Al Nusrah Front, Ahrar al Sham, Ansar al Din, Jaish al Muhajireen awl Ansar (JMA), Sham al Islam, and Harakat Sham al Islamhave thousands of hardened terrorist and suicide bombers. As revealed from the material found in Abbottabad, highly educated and trained Al-Qaeda operatives are capable of employing sophisticated threats to military networks. The majority have weapons from the clandestine operation of the CIA to topple the President of Syria.
Current Global Trends
Space-based C4ISR - Command, Control, Communication, Computers, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance has become the backbone of the U.S.A’s National Security Global Umbrella against global terrorism as well as rogue or sovereign states launching covert and possibly direct attacks. Those actions would nullify the Space Command and Control assets of the United States and its NATO allies.
The U.S. Air Force’s digitized (T-SAT) Transformational Satellite Communications System program consisted of a six-satellite constellation, satellite operations centers, a mission operations system and ground gateways. However on June 8, 2009, the U.S. Air Force terminated, under the direction of U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, for “convenience”, the (T-SAT) Mission Operations System contract with Lockheed Martin. Under the 2011 (DOD) U.S. Department of Defense budget cutting directives of the Obama Administration anti-military policy agenda, the U.S. now relies on both unsecured commercial and secured military satellites to form the core and edge Cyberspace hybrid networks. GPS Navigation and digital imagining Satellite Systems are an integral element in the U.S. Force’s global military projection capability.
On February 10, 2011, newly appointed Secretary of Defense and former CIA Director Leon Panetta of Monterey California told a U.S. House panel that cyber security is the international "battleground of the future." He went on to state that "…when it comes to national security, I think this represents the battlefield for the future. I’ve often said that I think the potential for the next Pearl Harbor could very well be a cyber-attack…Other countries are developing a significant capacity in this area, whether it's Russia or China or Iran," Panetta told the panel. "We're now the subject of literally hundreds of thousands of attacks that come in, in an effort to try to get information. We've got to develop not only defenses against that," he added, "but we've got to put our assets in places where we can provide sufficient warning that these attacks are coming."
On May 1, 2011, the discovery, surveillance, and termination of 9/11 mastermind, bin Laden, within his Abbottabad enclave was clear proof of the power of digitized unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV)s relays and satellites being the operational platforms for the U.S.’s global response against threats to its National Security interest.
On July 22, 2015, the USAF launched WGS-7 satellite. “WGS procurement is through contracts with the Boeing Company issued by the American Air Force Space Command's Military Satellite Communications (MILSATCOM) Systems Directorate. The MILSATCOM Systems Directorate plans for, acquires, and sustains space-enabled global communications to support
the U.S. President, Secretary of Defense, and global combat forces. WGS is (America’s) next-generation wideband satellite communications system. It is augmenting and replacing the Defense Satellite Communication System (DSCS), the Department of Defense’s network backbone for wideband satellite communications over the last twenty years. The (Los Angeles California) Space and Missile Systems Center is the U.S. Air Force's center of acquisition excellence for acquiring and developing military space systems including Global Positioning System (GPS), military satellite communications, defense meteorological satellites, space launch and range systems, satellite control networks, space-based infrared systems, and space Situational awareness capabilities.”
“Back Sliding into the Past”
In 1940, Japan invaded French Indochina in an effort to control supplies reaching China. The United States halted shipments of airplanes, parts, machine tools, and aviation gasoline, which was perceived by Japan as an unfriendly act. The U.S. did not stop oil exports to Japan at that time in part because prevailing sentiment in Washington was that such an action would be an extreme step, given Japanese dependence on U.S. oil, and likely to be considered a provocation by Japan. After it was announced in September 1940 iron and steel scrap export would also be prohibited, Japanese Ambassador Horinouchi protested to Secretary Hull on October 8, 1940 warning this might be considered an "unfriendly act". The U.S. ceased oil exports to Japan on July 1941, following Japanese national security expansion into French Indochina after the fall of France, in part because of new American restrictions on domestic oil consumption. These U.S. State Department’s unintended consequences led to Pearl Harbor and 3,581 American casualties.
China has been transformed by U.S. global manufacturing outsourcing and rapid access of internet based technologies. By 2016, according to the IMF International Monetary Fund, China will overtake the United States in Economic output and threaten U.S.’s global military power. Is China the next threat to the U.S.’s global economic and military Power by nullifying C4ISR?
On May 4, 2011, testifying before the same House Appropriations commerce, justice, science subcommittee, Obama’s science adviser John Holdren said. “If China is going to be, by 2030, the biggest economy in the world … it could certainly be to our benefit to share the costs of such an expensive (Mars) venture with them and with others.” Retired Representative Frank Wolf (R-Va.), at the time, a staunch China critic who chaired the powerful subcommittee that oversaw NASA spending…characterized China’s government as ‘fundamentally evil,’ said it is outrageous that the Obama administration would have close ties with Beijing’s space program, which is believed to be run primarily by the People’s Liberation Army, or PLA.”
Many have commented that China continues to use stealth internet hacking means to gain high technology and Internet IP core knowledge. The FBI has known that China’s young PLA officers are working as programmers and software engineers in Google, Yahoo, Cisco Systems, etc. China has a long precedent of violating International Law and the guidelines for membership in the World Trade Organization (WTO). For over ten years China has routinely violated intellectual property rights of the U.S., EU, and Japan. According to James T. Areddy, “China has said almost 43,000 intellectual-property cases where taken up by its Courts in 2010…foreign executives in a range of industries in China continue to complain about copyright and patent infringement.” In a past American Chamber of Commerce in China survey, 58% of the respondents said their operations face ‘material damage’ from Chinese infringement, and 70% said Beijing’s protections are ineffective.” According to L. Gordon Crovitz, anadvisor to media and technology companies anda former publisher of The Wall Street Journal, “Beijing now spends as much on domestic security, including monitoring the Web, as it spends on its military, which includes the world’s largest standing army.”
Military and Government – China’s “One for Self” Policy
There is a belief that “Beijing’s generous support of its increasingly skilled aerospace research & development complex, rising defense budget (officially “In early 2014, IHS Jane’s, a consulting and analysis company that covers the industry, estimated that China would spend $148 billion … and probably significantly higher”), and ability to rapidly build industrial infrastructures…” has in the South China Sea already threatened the antiquated warfare doctrine of the American (DoD).
In January 2007, the PLA (Peoples Liberation Army) launched a ballistic missile and destroyed one of its own satellites. This anti-satellite test clearly demonstrated the technology that the (PLA) had received from overseas sources (i.e. JPL) and its growing superior skills in space based programs. The numerous (DoD) U.S. Department of Defense assessment reports on the Chinese Military, has shown a steady and quick progression of China expanding its military presence in space and has already demonstrated anti-satellite missile capability, its DF-31 nuclear missile technology, the (J-20) fourth generation stealth fighter programs, and aircraft carrier naval forces.
The 2008/2009 U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Reports stated that “China is aggressively pursuing cyber warfare capabilities that may provide it with an asymmetric advantage against the United States. In a conflict situation, this advantage would reduce current U.S. conventional military dominance…China also used its growing naval capabilities to assert a controversial theory of a 200-mile exclusive economic zone (in 2015 it was extend to 600-800 miles and UN did nothing) where foreign military vessels might be excluded.” Both of China’s allies Iran and North Korea are secretly developing militarized nuclear technologies. As the 2010 Quadrennial Defense Review Report notes, “China is developing and fielding large numbers of advanced medium-range ballistic and cruise missiles, new attack submarines equipped with advanced weapons, increasingly capable long-range air defense systems, electronic warfare and computer network attack capabilities, advanced fighter aircraft, and counter-space systems.” Intelligence experts have implied that China and Russia have the ability to provide “satellite and network kill technology” capabilities to rogue states such as North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela.
In January 2008, a computer virus, that can sow confusion by changing warfighter logistics requirements, using electrical pulse attacks that destroyed computer motherboards, and jamming communications and radar systems, was developed by the PLA Shenyang Military Region. According to National Defense- Information Office of the State Council of the People's Republic of China, December 2006, Beijing, the (PLA) seeks “to identify people with specific backgrounds, such as advanced degree holders, people who had studied overseas, people credited with major scientific research achievements, and computer networking experts are being tasked with more sophisticated network operations that require both advanced technical expertise and knowledge of foreign languages or cultures.”
On December 18, 2014, the 6th J-20 stealth fighter prototype took off from the Chengdu Aviation Corporation factory. China continues to test the look-alike U.S. F-22. In 2015, Barak Hussein Obama, an ancestor Kenyan, and his negotiating team of John Kerry, Jack Lew, and Ernest Moniz “accepted an accord (with the terrorist state of Iran) that not only would fail to stop Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon but could eventually help it.”
The Facts-U.S. Defense Firms Rushed to provide Technology to China (2000-2013)
The U.S. State Department, under Mrs. Hillary Clinton, asserted that “it is America’s role in enforcing the peace and that it was in America’s national interest to do so.” According to the Economist, July 2010, “in 2009, the American Government offered a pact of ‘strategic reassurance’ with China, in which America would welcome China’s rise as a global power if it would reassure the world that it did not threaten others.” During the May 9, 2011 Strategic and Economic Dialogue, Vice Premier Wang Qishan said that “the U.S. must set a ‘clear timetable and road map’ for meeting China’s economic request. These include the U.S. relaxing controls on the export of high-tech products, granting recognition of China as a market economy to give it more power under international trade rules, giving fair access to China companies investing in the U.S…” In 2014, the Economist wrote “even in security, America must make room. China’s participation in America’s recent RIMPAC naval exercises off Hawaii was a start. China could be invited to join Asian exercises, including for disaster relief. And America should avoid a cold-war battle for the loyalty of regional powers.” China maintains its cultural tapestry of smiling while threatening.
American Global Multinationals
American Global Multinationals have been providing aerospace technology sharing partnerships for many years. Many other space and aerospace related U.S. firms such as Loral Space Systems, Boeing, Rockwell Collins, and Lockheed Martin have been involved in China’s Aerospace Industry try for over 20 years.
In 2009, The U.S. began to relax technology export controls as witnessed by numerous examples in 2009 and now in 2015. Also, the U.S. International Trade Administration, Department of Commerce has been active in an Aerospace Supplier (Supply Chain) Development to China. Cisco Systems(NASDAQ:CSCO)the manufacturer of a Space-based Routers (Internet Routing in Space) and other key space-based network building blocks became an integral link in the U.S. Government’s goal of “internet in space,” had committed over US $16 billion in new investments in China. In 2011 Cisco invested US $1 billion dollars in Russia, a key aerospace technology supplier to the (PLA). On June 17, 2015, John Chambers the outgoing President of Cisco Systems announced “over $10 billion investment in China, striving to support local innovation, industrial transformation and economic growth through a series of strategic partnerships.”
Overlapping the Military Battle Space Architecture?
Under the defense cutting directives of the Obama Administration, the U.S. relies on both commercial and military satellites to form core and edge Cyberspace hybrid networks. GPS Navigation and digital imagining Satellite Systems have been an integral element in the U.S. Force global military projection capability. The Space Infrastructure consists of the global network of equipment designers, manufacturers, spaceports and command and control facilities. Also the Progressive Socialist Administration includes the launch vehicles, space stations, satellites, spaceports, ground stations and science and robotic exploration systems and the commercial companies developing human spaceflight capability.
According to the 2010 Space Foundation Report, “the global launch industry carried out 74 orbital launches in 2010, compared to 78 launches during 2009… In spite of the lower launch rate in 2010, more payloads were launched than in 2009; 118 payloads were carried into space in 2010, up from 111 the year before. Russia remains the world launch leader, conducting 31 launches in 2010, followed by the United States and China, each with 15. Two new vehicles, the Minotaur IV and the Falcon 9, were launched for the first time in 2010. With its Dragon capsule, the Falcon 9 is intended to provide cargo transportation for the ISS.”
Further, the Space Foundation Report stated that “as of the end of 2010, there were an estimated 957 active satellites in orbit around Earth. One of the recent growth areas is the field of satellite-based broadband internet connectivity. Commercial operators are seeking to provide broadband internet to consumers in underserved areas, sometimes with support from government programs. Meanwhile, mobile satellite service providers are pressing ahead with the deployment of next-generation satellite constellations to replace those reaching the end of their lives.”
By 2013 according to the Satellite Industry Association, “the U.S. satellite manufacturing revenues increased 33% (slightly more than in 2012). U.S. firms built about 27% of the spacecraft launched in 2013, and earned 70% of global satellite manufacturing revenues. 75% of U.S. satellite manufacturing revenues were from U.S. government contracts.27 satellites with HTS-capable payloads currently on orbit, with 24 HTS are on order and/or under construction.
Although High throughput satellites HTS are mostly in GEO, 4 HTS were launched to MEO in 2013 for O3b’s broadband constellation, with 8 more awaiting launch or under construction.
The number of commercially-procured launches conducted worldwide in 2013 (62) was up slightly from 2012 (59). Overall satellite launch industry revenues decreased by 7% globally in 2013, compared with a 21% increase in 2012. The lower revenues stemmed from fewer higher-cost launches, including: 3 fewer commercially-procured Arianespace launches than in 2012; and only 1 Sea Launch conducted in 2013, versus 3 in 2012. Government customers worldwide remained the major satellite launch revenue driver, reaching 70% of commercially-procured satellite launch revenues, up from 64% in 2012. The U.S. had the largest share of commercially-procured launch revenues (45%), with over 70% of the revenues coming from launching U.S. government satellites.
Budget Cuts and a major shift to Commercial Providers
The U.S. Federal Government was project to procure $3.5 billion in commercial satellite communications services between 2011 and 2016. This could result in huge vulnerabilities for a military network that is rapidly moving into the less cyber secure commercial satellite communications sectors. Custom SatCom Solutions, dubbed CS2, was the third and final part of Future Commercial Satellite Communications (FCSA), a joint procurement that the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) and the General Services Administration have been planning for more than three years. (FCSA) encompasses three expiring SatCom contracts: (1) DISA’s Defense Information System Network (DISN) Satellite Transmission. (2) Service-Global (DSTS-G)/Inmarsat contracts, and (3) GSA’s SatCom II. The range of solutions remains immense; new technologies, services and custom solutions, distance learning and telemedicine, continuity of operations, broadcast satellite services, emergency responder operations, direct warfighter operations and steady-state operations. The possibilities of enemies taking advantage of security gaps only increases with greater layers of the network being exposed to asymmetric attacks.
US Commercial Provider and Warfighters
The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) mission in Afghanistan would be challenging for any military organization. It is doubly so for a force composed of units speaking different languages and using different equipment. Simply achieving what the military calls “situational awareness” (knowledge shared by commanders and troops about the battle space) presents a challenge for NATO's Allied Command Operations. A separate group, Allied Command Transformation (ACT) in Norfolk, Virginia, focuses on preparing NATO for its future. To support the (ISAF), (ACT) began working with Globecomm to specify and design a Force Tracking System (FTS) that could be used by all NATO units in Afghanistan to share information and prevent friendly-fire casualties. The result was a first for NATO was a standard called the NATO Friendly Force Identifier (NFFI). This is critical in assisting with the identification of friendly forces and helps prevent fratricide or "blue-on-blue" incidents.
In 2012, David E. Hershberg, Founder of Globecomm, spoke that “we now have also developed the NATO (FTS) interfaced with the U.S. Military (FTS)…also we bought a company that has been doing a lot of communication projects inside and outside (of Afghanistan) with the US Army, Afghan National Army and Police,(like Kandahar) there are 24 forward observation posts (FOP)s, that we are working at…our customers include NATO, State Department, Ministry of Communication and Interior, United Nations, etc., and we are providing a lot of networks. For Managed and Hosted Services, we have Ericsson Switches and provide cellular services to the bases in Afghanistan out of Long Island New York, but the switches are in New York and radio systems are in the Afghan military bases. We provide these services for NATO and the US Army. We go by fiber to the EU, and then we run a satellite service from the EU into Afghanistan. We also work in Iraq for the State Department. We own the networks. AfTel communication system was installed by us over six years ago and we provide engineering and connectivity for their space and internet segments.” In 2014, NATO-ISAF had 48 Troop Contributing Nations with a small total strength of 44,299 military personnel or 55 battalions. It is estimated that the Taliban lost 35,000 fighters since the Afghanistan War began. Further, that the Taliban only can battle field 2,000 to 4,000 fighters. The numbers do not lie. Why is the war continuing in Afghanistan?
Changing C4ISR Network Architectural Nodes
Satellite and cellular communications are critical spokes of any command and control operations. Both of these communication technologies rely heavily on the Internet, which is extended to the switches, back hauls, hubs, and secured (IDC) Data Centers and Operations Centers.
Communications satellites are either (1) narrowband systems that suffice for voice transmissions but lack bandwidth, (2) wideband systems for sending large amounts of data, (3)High throughput satellites HTS or (4) protected satellites that are hardened against jamming and nuclear effects.
“The GIG is the globally interconnected, end-to-end set of information capabilities for collecting, processing, storing, disseminating, and managing information on demand to warfighters, policy makers, and support personnel. The GIG includes owned and leased communications and computing systems and services, software (including applications), data, security services, other associated services, and National Security Systems. Non-GIG IT includes stand-alone, self-contained, or embedded IT that is not, and will not be, connected to the enterprise network.”(DODD 8000.01)
The Global Information Grid (GIG) includes the Wideband Gapfiller System (WGS) or next generation wideband), the Mobile User Objective System (MUOS or next generation narrowband),Advanced Extremely High Frequency (AEHF next generation protected referred to as Milstar III), and an Advanced Polar System for various strategic missions
Within a 2013 NSA document, “to ensure a consistent "Defense-in-Depth" implementation across component systems of the GIG, IA architectural concepts must ultimately be translated into specific architecture guidance, IA standards and protocols, technical requirements, and policy. This applies to existing, emerging, and future system development efforts such as the Joint Tactical Radio System (JTRS), Warfighter Information Network-Tactical (WIN-T), Intelligence Community System for Information Sharing (ICSIS), Transformational Communications (TC), and other programs supporting the GIG vision.”
AEHF (Advanced Extreme High Frequency Satellite)
The first AEHF-1 was launched on Aug. 14, 2010 thus allowing operators to communicate in a wide range of environmental conditions. The AEHF (Advanced Extreme High Frequency Satellite), a.k.a. AWS (Advanced Wideband Satellite), program is the next generation of highly secure, high capacity, survivable communications to the U.S. warfighters during all levels of conflict, and will become the protected backbone of the Department of Defense's military satellite communications architecture.
MUOS (Mobile User Objective System)
MUOS (Mobile User Objective System) is a next-generation narrowband tactical satellite communications system designed to significantly improve ground communications for U.S. forces on the move. According to the US Navy, “MUOS works like a smartphone network in space, vastly improving secure satellite communications for mobile U.S. forces. MUOS provides users a global, on-demand, beyond-line-of-sight capability to transmit and receive high-quality voice and mission data on a high-speed Internet Protocol-based system. MUOS-3, along with MUOS-1 and -2 already on-orbit, will provide communications coverage to more than three-quarters of the globe.” Lockheed Martin in Sunnyvale California stated in press releases that “The launch of this next satellite, designated MUOS-4 by the Navy and expected in the second half of 2015, will complete the operational constellation and provide global coverage.”
Wideband Global Satcom (WGS)
Wideband Global Satellites (WGS) aka Wideband Gapfiller Satellite system are successors to the DSCS-3 series of communication satellites. WGS is a high capacity satellite communications system planned for use in partnership by the United States Department of Defense (DoD) and the Australian Department of Defense. A single WGS spacecraft has as much bandwidth as the entire existing DSCS constellation. United Launch Alliance believes that “this high-capacity satellite communications system is intended to support the warfighter with newer and far greater capabilities than provided by current systems.” WGS will augment DOD communications services currently provided by the Defense Satellite Communications System (DSCS), which provides Super High Frequency (SHF) wideband communications, and by the Ka-band Global Broadcast Service (GBS), which uses direct broadcast satellite technology to provide critical information to U.S. and allied forces. WGS was to provide early transformational capabilities supporting government objectives for a (TCA) Transformational Communications Architecture. (TCA) is the end-to end satellite communication transport segment of the Department of Defense Global Information Grid (GIG). Global Security believes that “the WGS satellites will complement the DSCS III Service Life Enhancement Program (SLEP) and GBS payloads and will offset the eventual decline in DSCS III capability. WGS will offer 4.875 GHz of instantaneous switchable bandwidth, thus each WGS can supply more than 10 times the capacity of a DSCS III Service Life Enhancement Program (SLEP) satellite. Once the full constellation of 6 WGS satellites is operational, they will replace the DSCS system. WGS-1 with its 2.4 Gbit/s wideband capacity, provided greater capability and bandwidth than all the DSCS satellites combined.” It is the U.S. Governments efforts to create an “internet in the sky.”
DSCS-3 (Defense Satellite Communications System 3)
DSCS-3 (Defense Satellite Communications System 3) are geostationary military communication satellites, which provide a robust anti-jam, nuclear hardened capability that supports Department of Defense (DOD) worldwide requirements, White House and Diplomatic communications. They are the follow-on generation of the DSCS-2 satellites. “DSCS is a military satellite constellation placed in geosynchronous orbit to provide high-volume, secure voice and data communications. Phases II and III were successors to the IDSCS (Initial Defense Satellite Communications System) program which began in 1966 with the launch of the first 8 satellites of this constellation. The DSCS system has been an extremely valuable asset for supporting military and government communications over the past several decades, “according to NASA.
Satellites and UAVs
According to the Defense Systems Magazine, “space and aerial reconnaissance produce images of people and infrastructure are key for “situational awareness” on the battlefield for the warfighters, homeland security, and police forces. The satellites and UAVs complemented each other with the satellites delivering excellent long-range snapshots, and the UAVs offering full-motion video.”
Satellites have the ability to take excellent long-range snapshots, using either electro-optical cameras or powerful Synthetic Aperture Radars, which can plot the movements of moving targets. Most Unmanned Aerial Vehicles, by contrast, capture movement with their day- and nighttime full-motion video cameras. However, Global Hawk functions a little more like a satellite, receiving and transmitting. For situational awareness National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) builds virtual computerize models — that data inputs are taken from the sensor systems. A network constellation is formed from KH-11 imaging birds, Lacrosse radar-sats and other spacecraft into orbits for a targeted region. Barry Watts, a senior analyst with the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments spoke that, “You might even be able to get a sequential passage — one bird goes by and another bird goes by,” in a fast sequence. (NGA) Director Letitia A. Long wrote on May 2, 2011. “(NGA) applied a range of geospatial intelligence (GEOINT) capabilities including imagery, geospatial and targeting analysis, along with image sciences and modeling that, supplemented with work from the CIA and NSA, allowed the United States to carry out this operation.”
On April 14, 2015, Robert Cardillo, Director, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, spoke “In 2014, Russia moved swiftly to occupy and annex Crimea. It has put enormous strain on the Ukraine and all of NATO by redefining armed aggression…Today, there are more than 3 billion Internet users and more than 2 billion smart phones—not simple mobile phones, but smart phones. By 2021, the Internet and the smart phone will spread quickly to the “O3”—that is, the other 3 billion people who will join this community. Social media and its immediate impact on global events will become ever more ubiquitous. The Internet of Things has emerged with geolocation sensors in everything from self-driven automobiles to our clothing. And all are capable of communicating with each other.”
Actions to Mitigate the Threats
Asymmetric Cyber Warfare
Weaponization of software used to attack electronic targets connected to the Internet has a clear reality to modern militaries. The United States and NATO are dependent on computer networks for rapid sharing of information and the operation of critical infrastructure. According to a 2009 Northrup Grumman’s Capability of the People’s Republic of China to Conduct Cyber Warfare and Computer Network Exploitation Report…“the Core goals of Integrated Network Electronic Warfare (INEW) strategy are based on precision targeting and disciplined coordination to strike carefully selected nodes of an enemy’s information systems judged to have maximum operational impact. The goal is to establish control over the adversary’s ability to access or disseminate information…large scale distributed denial of server attacks or high profile Web defacements can also potentially undo backchannel or even overt diplomatic efforts to resolve a crisis or negate the effects of carefully crafted psychological operations.” In 2015, China was labeled as culprit that hacked the U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) affecting 18-32 million and additionally thousands of contractors.
The U.S. Army’s War College Center for Strategic Leadership, wrote that “the daily lives of Americans and many other global cultures rely on increasingly vulnerable networks for electric power, finance, education, and a host of other critical but often taken-for-granted services.Cyberspace, in its working definition is ubiquitous across government and private industry, from national defense to small private enterprises connecting all aspects of life unlike any other medium in human history. The Internet, as it was originally conceived and evolved, gave little priority to security. Therefore, its vulnerabilities grow as more critical government and private organizations increasingly depend upon its availability to conduct day-to-day operations. In the military, concepts such as Information Operations and Network Centric Warfare rely on complex information systems that utilize global computer networks…” According to Kevin Coleman, a cyber-intel analyst and expert, “…cyber intelligence is a strategic priority. Technical cyber intelligence must be augmented by new and some traditional methods and sources used to provide insight and foresight into this complex and multifaceted area. One such traditional method of intelligence collection that is critical to cyber is human intelligence.”
Space-based Network Architecture
The USAF has launched several satellite systems to provide enhanced situational awareness by launching systems advanced military infrared satellite. A new (SBIRS) Space Based Infrared System constellation will soon replace legacy Defense Support Program satellites. On May 7, 2011, the U.S.AF launched GEO-1 satellite built by Lockheed-Martin, known as GEO-1, the first Space Based Infrared System geosynchronous spacecraft and is the most technologically advanced military infrared satellite ever developed. The spacecraft was designed to deliver the most highly sophisticated infrared missile warning capabilities while simultaneously improving the U.S.’s missile defense, technical intelligence and battle space awareness. U.S. Air Force General Roger Teague, director of the Space and Missile Systems Center’s Infrared Space Systems Directorate stated that "GEO-1 represents the dawn of a new era in overhead persistent infrared surveillance that will greatly improve our national security space architecture for years to come.”The constellation will consist of four SBIRS. In May 2015, the Air Force has successfully completed the on-orbit checkout of the third Space Based Infrared System (SBIRS) sensor operating in a highly elliptical orbit (HEO-3) over the northern hemisphere.
The current 31 GPS satellite Constellation will see the launches of the additional 12 GPS IIF satellites which will provide enhanced military signals that are more resistant to jamming, greater accuracy through advanced atomic clock technology, a new third civil signal for safety-of-life applications and a longer design life of 12 years.
In January 2011, Air Force announced that it had successfully demonstrated over-the-air, low-data-rate communication between an orbiting Milstar satellite and the Family of Advanced Beyond line-of-sight Terminal. The test included a series of uplink and downlink communication tests that involved passing voice and data communication between a third-generation (Block 8) FAB-T unit and the legacy Milstar satellite. The FAB-T unit used its low-data-rate software to transmit through its newly developed large aircraft antenna. The Block 8 FAB-T terminal offers high-data-rate communications with Advanced Extremely High Frequency (EHF) satellites, but also provides backward capability with legacy Milstar satellites using low-data-rate communications.
In 2011, Mark Dale, former Vice President of Product Management for Comtech EF Data, spoke “that there are ways to attack in an asymmetric way such as shooting a missile to intercept a satellite. Yes, that is possible as China has demonstrated that capability, but that would be an act of war and not really asymmetric, but a symmetric action. Still you would not see an al-Qaeda person being able to do that. GEOs would take longer rockets to get to them. Still there is built in redundancy to launch other satellites to replace those lost and other communication means to overcome that particular threat such as UAVs and ad hoc networks. However they are still in the conceptual or planning stages. If they started to shoot down major satellites tomorrow that would have a major impact on the DOD communication network... Satellites are basically links back to the existing (terrestrial) communication infrastructure. So that would have a major impact. You could also attack a satellite by not blowing it up by interfering with it operations. People have done that accidently by transmitting the wrong frequency. You can point to the wrong satellite and you accidently jam the satellite. That happens all the time. But if it is done maliciously that could also disrupt the satellite. You have be a very dedicated foe with sophisticated equipment to jam MilSats, but on the other side, (WGS) or (DSCS) or the vast amount of commercial satellites that the military now uses and those types of systems are easy to penetrate. They must find out where the interference is coming from and then remedy the problem, but that is inherent in a transponder satellite. You have to locate the interferer and find it, but that could be disruptive in the field. It would scale back the bandwidth and thus the military would have to do with less… Now with the launch of the (WGS) systems, now commercial capability is being moved up to DOD owned satellites. However, the DOD will continue to use commercial satellites and there is no remedy for this.”
Terrestrial based Internet Architectures –Wireless and VSAT
The Internet and wireless phones are still an integral part of the U.S., Japan, and NATO as well as the global terrorist communication command and control structure. Eleven years after the second “Pearl Harbor” for the U.S., the United States still needs a comprehensive approach to countering the threat of global and homegrown terrorism. According to the a special report by Joseph I. Lieberman, Ranking Member U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Washington D.C. February 2011, “amechanisms for interagency information-sharing and operational coordination” continues to plague the U.S.’s ability to learn from the lack of intelligence leading up to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. Four years later, the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Washington D.C has had little hearings on “the lack of intelligence leading up to the terrorist attack” like the July 16, 2015 murder of 5 marines by Mohammad Youssduf Adbulazeez, a Kuwait naturalized citizen living in Chattanooga, Tennessee. Numerous examples of killings by Jihadist radicalized by ISIS have gone unheeded by blotted bureaucracy of America’s Homeland Security run by political appointees.
A Clear and Present Vulnerability
The vulnerability of Internet Networks has become very clear when hackers routinely from China, Russia, and North Korea and within the Middle East enter the server databases of Government, Corporate, and Private Entities. Even hand-held devices are not immune from attacks such as Apple’s iPhones, Android Phones and personal computers. Software for these devices is the pathways into a vulnerability oasis. As the Defense Daily printed on May 5, 2011, published “Defense contractors, government agencies and the military all have a stake in safeguarding their networks from attack. Defending against and defeating cyber-attacks will require the combined efforts of both the public and private sectors, working to develop new technologies and new approaches, for maintaining real-time protection of their individual networks. While the danger of poorly protected cyber networks can strike fear in both the government and private sector, the opportunities for both defense and government contractors as well government agencies are endless when they work together to guard against cyber-attacks.” On Sunday July 12, 2015, Dick Clarke spoke on Disney’s ABC news that “Cyber Security Efforts Show 'Almost Criminal Negligence.’” Four years later, the threat still exist for cyber-attacks on the U.S. Homeland, but it appears that the current Administration does not have a priority to combat them except to write speeches for President Obama to read on the teleprompter.
Digital Mobile Space Constellations
In 2011, Globalstar was working to develop the next generation Satellite communication. Globalstar has partnered with European (Arianespace)–Russian (Soyuz) company Starsem. (Soyuz is part of RKK Energiya, a Russian manufacturer of spacecraft and space station components. It is the prime developer and contractor of the Russian manned spaceflight program; it also owns a majority of Sea Launch). Globalstar Government customers with enhanced next-generation and legacy global satellite services beyond 2025.Thales Alenia Space had a contract to design, manufacture, and deliver 48 satellites to replace the existing out of date satellites that are currently in orbit. “The Globalstar second-generation constellation will consist of 32 Low Earth Orbiting (LEO) satellites. The Globalstar satellite is simple; each consists of a communications system of both S and L-band antennas, a trapezoidal body, two solar arrays and each satellite operates at an altitude of 1,414km (approximately 876 miles). The second-generation satellites are manufactured by Thales Alenia Space. The satellites utilize "bent-pipe" architecture. On any given call, several satellites transmit a caller's signal via CDMA technology to a satellite dish at the appropriate gateway where the call is then routed locally through the terrestrial telecommunications system.” The second generation Globalstar constellation’s security protocols and hardware elements for Government and DOD warfighters are unclear.
In 2011, the Iridium constellation had 66 satellites in orbit The Iridium constellation is also being upgraded in partnership with SpaceX. From 2015 through 2017, Iridium planned to replace its current low-earth-orbit satellite constellation with a total of 72 new satellites and on-orbit spares, which will provide more features, more flexibility, and more bandwidth. Iridium NEXT’s improvements will include data rates up to 1 Mbps, Ka-band service, private network gateways, and broadcast and netted services. Like Globalstar, Iridium has had satellite failure that disrupted service. According to the Defense Industry Daily, “Once launched into space, Iridium hopes that its next generation of satellites will offer a number of new options, beyond just higher bandwidth. The existing Iridium constellation is already being used in some innovative ways. The USMC’s Netted Iridium Program is using it as an over-the horizon command and control link from ships to inland Marines. Boeing’s HI/i-GPS is far more significant, however, leveraging the Iridium constellation to supplement and improve the US military’s critical NAVSTAR GPS system.” According to the company, “Iridium NEXT — Iridium’s second-generation global satellite constellation is scheduled to begin launching in 2015, Iridium NEXT will maintain the existing Iridium® constellation architecture of 66 cross-linked Low-Earth Orbit (LEO) satellites covering 100 percent of the globe. It will dramatically enhance Iridium's ability to meet the rapidly-expanding demand for truly global mobile communications on land, at sea and in the skies.” Iridium’s $3 billion Iridium Next 2nd generation constellation of low-orbiting satellites was scheduled to make its inaugural launch, of two satellites, in June 2015 aboard a Russian-Ukrainian Dnepr rocket from Russia’s Yasny spaceport. The remaining launches were contracted with SpaceX aboard Falcon 9 rockets, each carrying 10 Iridium Next satellites. These launches were scheduled to start in late 2015 and to be completed by mid-2017. The June 28, 2015 explosion on the launch of the Falcon 9 has impacted those Iridium plans. According to the Silicon Valley star Elon Musk, “SpaceX doesn’t have any planned commercial launches until after September 2015.”
Secure User Terminals
Both Military and Government face challenges in the field as environments are diverse – from fixed and at-the-pause to on-the move. Bandwidth demands are ever-increasing with requirements to transmit voice, data and video traffic over both government and commercial satellite links. Compatibility between multi-site networks and remote locations is essential. Security, redundancy, and reliability are crucial. Each program has a unique set of communications requirements, which can include the use of both Commercial-off-the-Shelf (COTS) and Military Standard (MILSTD) solutions, multi-carrier and multi-frequency, ranges of data rates and scalability. In some warfighter locations such as Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya or wherever communications systems are deployed, advanced modulation techniques may be needed to enable use of smaller antennas and remote management capabilities can be required if trained personnel are not on site. Some of the advanced terminals require trained personnel.
User terminals are vulnerable as they can be removed during the “fog of war” and used to monitor sensitive military operational traffic or they could be purchased on the commercial markets. Globecomm’s vice president Paul Knudsen spoke that “there were lots of technology challenges. The complexity of the satellite and terrestrial link was unique. Signals from the (FTS) units were relayed via satellite to Europe and were then backhauled terrestrially to North America and transmitted to the (ISAF) HQ in Afghanistan. That's where the control suite compiled and processed the data, which was transmitted back through the same chain to the individual terminals in the vehicles…The enemy was using radio frequencies very close to the band our transceivers used." Knudsen added that “the electronic countermeasures (ECM) meant to jam them were knocking our systems off the air as well. We solved that by shielding the terminals from the ECM."
Mark Dale spoke that “.but for a smaller, more capable interferer, there are things you can do by spread spectrum and give yourself a little bit of protection which would enable you to work under interference. As the amount of interference goes up, you have to dial up your protection, but it would simply slow down. The tradeoff is that you have to fundamentally reduce the bandwidth, the capability, the data rate as you are operating in order to accommodate these scenarios. There are not any means in the field to protect or to jam the signals, but the DOD is now looking at. If someone started today, in the commercial satellites there is not a lot of capability to protect a satellite from jamming. Looking forward, you will see some work in that area for commercial satellites...the reason is that DOD system often uses “trans-ID” for they encrypt the system over the air, the modems for example actually execute encryption of the air and the data as well coming into it, thus they are doubly encrypted with very strong encryption. The US Government to protect its classified data is called Type One Encryption which is NSA certified. They are very difficult to break. The Commercial people use extra protection which is called sensitive and unclassified data called Advanced Encryption Standard (AES)-256, the commercial standard is Federal Information Procession (FIPS) 140.-2…the odds of someone hacking into the network are that this will not happen not over the satellite, but it would be more of a networking thing versus the satellite. In other words, if someone else got access into the network somewhere, it is not a satellite concern.”
Internet Operation/Management Centers
(IDC/SOC) Internet Data Centers/Satellite Operations Centers are key banks of storage and transfer points in the making the IP based global network run. (IDC/SOC)s are located at heavily protected buildings where the security personnel are on guard 24x7.. Internal as well as external such as software hacking and overt physical actions can nullify the transmission of key IP based network centric warfare operations.
David E. Hershberg further spoke that “we own three teleports that we use for backup traffic and operate out 11 teleports. On the critical, it is connected by fiber, so we have back up on data. We use the Virtual Private Network (VPN) network, there is back up there as long as it is encrypted. The US Government and NATO does not like to use it (VPN), but we find those networks (VPNs) are more reliable than, to a large extent, dedicated networks. Dedicated networks go through three or four carriers. For (FTS) in Afghanistan for NATO, the actual computers and operations are in Colorado and other places; therefore we have to keep up a very robust link between Afghanistan and then to Colorado which goes by satellite to Holland, goes to Fiber to Canada, then to Colorado, then to Long Island and goes to fiber back to Germany, and then into Afghanistan…the point is that if you have a critical link, you must have different way of connecting that, plus different ways of protecting it from getting it hacked and swapped. However, that takes care of those vulnerabilities. You must have a very robust system..most of these networks are now IP based and that is why they can work with everybody. These are the issues of “information assurance” and encryption. We can handle a certain level of encryption. We can now store encryption, but the Government controls it. If the Government wants to provide encryption, then we do not provide it. The Government also encrypts the cell phones which is Government provided. We provide some encryption but not all of it. We build a lot of militarized (COTS) equipment and that equipment can interface with any type of cyber security that is put into it.”
Sharpening the Digital Spear
A robust cyber intelligence capability that blends traditional approaches with modern technology will become essential if the United States intends to gain superiority over adversaries and to protect its C4ISR assets from a sneak attack.
Satellites provide essential in-theater secure communications, weather and navigational data for ground, air and fleet operations and threat warning. The clear threat areas for satellites are nuclear jamming, interference of high data rate, and the disruption of long haul communications by the use of satellite laser beams and high microwave jamming techniques. Any of these network nodes that support global attack,rapid global mobility, information superiority, andagile combat support can be impeded so that Land, Air and Space battle space advantage is removed by a combined satellite and network architecture simultaneous attacks. Cisco Systems Space-based Routers and other key space-based network building blocks could be easily destroyed by a stealth global-wide attack and cripple the US military and defense C4ISR space and terrestrial networks.
In 2011, David E. Hershberg spoke then that “if you provide towers at the (FOP) s or microwave links, you are only going to operate if the Taliban lets you operate…If you put a satellite earth station in the (FOP) s, you can protect them from being jammed. If the Taliban does not get help from Iran or Libya, you are not going to have a problem (with the earth stations). These people (Taliban) are not capable of jamming. Now with the (WGS) going with K-Band and new Commercial Satellites with K-Band, very narrow beam antennas, 1 kilometer, they only cover small areas, to try to jam them is not very easy. The newer satellites will be less susceptible to jamming. Integral Systems’satID Geolocation system can identify where the jammers are located.”
However, the strategies and tactics which would create a final Pearl Harbor for the United States and NATO are still unknown and need to be developed.
Avoiding a Pearl Harbor Moment
Many examples exist of failures in intelligence such as Operation Barbarossa, Pearl Harbor, Yom Kippur War, Falkland War, 9/11 and al-Qa'ida’s bin Laden. It is clear that the best deterrent to a “Space Related Pearl Harbor” is eternal vigilance and restriction of Internet based technology transfers that can be weaponized while a politically correct U.S. State Department adheres to the view of a “peaceful world” in which Global Commerce trumps overt and covert military actions against the U.S., Japan, and NATO.
As stated by the Council on Foreign Relations stated in a 2009 Report to the U.S. Congress, ”Over the past several years, China has begun a new phase of military development by beginning to articulate roles and missions for the PLA that go beyond China’s immediate territorial interests.”
According to the June 22 2015 Diplomat Magazine, “with Beijing pushing for a broader Asian trade pact, the U.S.-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) talks face an increasing battle to remain relevant. Economist, “the row over TPP risks undermining American leadership in Asia and beyond…” China has built its economy on its low labor cost, its ability to use intellectual services and products without regard to copyright or patent rights, liberal bank loans, and pretending to live by Western rules of ethics.
According to Mark Dale, “The more of a “Pearl Harbor” type of thing would be more of denying service essentially by jamming the signal, which would be the most likely way for an asymmetric foe to do it. With a much more capable type of foe they would down the satellites with ballistics and that would be much more serious…one of the reasons US forces have been so dominant… is that they so much better ‘situational awareness’ capability than their adversaries. That ‘situational awareness’ comes from and is enabled from the superior communications (over the space, over the air, over the ground) which US Forces have today. So to deny service that would be a key element in future conflicts.”
As in Pearl Harbor, an attack against a software vulnerability that has not yet been addressed by the private sector is difficult to defend as the U.S. learned in 1941. The vulnerability exists because the impossible is not considered. It becomes a Maginot Line mentality that could never happen when the IP architecture rest on each node layer being linked into a system-of-systems, thus a removal of one link destroys the process unless redundancy is built in.
A “war battle satellite” can be easily placed in orbit with a stealth signature which can then systematically remove the Voice, Video, Data platforms, Big Data, Cloud Computing, and links in conjunction with the removal of terrestrial power supplied to the (TT&C) s Tracking, Telemetry, and Control, (OMC) s Operation Management Centers, (SOC) s Satellite Operation Centers, (NOC) s Network Operation Centers, Hubs, and Server-based Data Centers. As in the “Pearl Harbor” scenario, one stroke of the sword, decapitates the foe and leaves the body.