Thursday, January 22, 2009

 

ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE BOMB INFO

AMERICA (POLITICAL BABYLON)

EZEKIEL 39:21
21 And I will set my glory among the heathen, and all the heathen shall see my judgment that I have executed, and my hand that I have laid upon them.

ISAIAH 18:1-2
1 Woe to the land shadowing with wings, which is beyond the rivers of Ethiopia:
2 That sendeth ambassadors by the sea, even in vessels of bulrushes upon the waters, saying, Go, ye swift messengers, to a nation scattered and peeled, to a people terrible from their beginning hitherto; a nation meted out and trodden down, whose land the rivers have spoiled!

JEREMIAH 50:11,37,12
11 Because ye were glad, because ye rejoiced, O ye destroyers of mine heritage, because ye are grown fat as the heifer at grass, and bellow as bulls;(BACKSLIDERS)
37 A sword is upon their horses, and upon their chariots, and upon all the mingled people that are in the midst of her; and they shall become as women: a sword is upon her treasures; and they shall be robbed.(A NATION OF MINGLED PEOPLE)
12 Your mother shall be sore confounded; she that bare you shall be ashamed:(MOTHER ENGLAND) behold, the hindermost of the nations shall be a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert.

JEREMIAH 51:13,7,53
13 O thou that dwellest upon many waters, abundant in treasures, thine end is come, and the measure of thy covetousness.
7 Babylon hath been a golden cup in the LORD's hand, that made all the earth drunken: the nations have drunken of her wine; therefore the nations are mad.
53 Though Babylon should mount up to heaven, and though she should fortify the height of her strength, yet from me shall spoilers come unto her, saith the LORD.

REVELATION 18:3,5,7
3 For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.
5 For her sins have reached unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities.
7 How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much torment and sorrow give her: for she saith in her heart, I sit a queen, and am no widow, and shall see no sorrow.

JEREMIAH 50:3,24
3 For out of the north there cometh up a nation against her, which shall make her land desolate, and none shall dwell therein: they shall remove, they shall depart, both man and beast.
24 I have laid a snare for thee, and thou art also taken, O Babylon, and thou wast not aware: thou art found, and also caught, because thou hast striven against the LORD. (RUSSIA A SNEAK ATTACK)

REVELATION 18:10
10 Standing afar off for the fear of her torment, saying, Alas, alas that great city Babylon, that mighty city! for in one hour is thy judgment come.

ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE STORIES
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/1988/CM2.htm

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-1260026.html

ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE BOMB VIDEOS
http://www.truveo.com/Electromagnetic-Pulse-Weapons-EMP-12/id/2890669331

http://videos.howstuffworks.com/discovery/7102-electromagnetic-pulse-bomb-video.htm

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&rlz=1T4ADBF_enCA303CA303&q=russia%2Felectromagnetic%20pulse%20bomb&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wv#

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mVKR68nDiw&eurl=http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl=en&rlz=1T4ADBF_enCA303CA303&q=russia%2Felectromagnetic%20pulse%20bomb&feature=player_embedded

http://vodpod.com/watch/837070-electromagnetic-pulse-attack-future-weapons-serial

Electro-magnetic Pulse (EMP) Systems

Russia is among the best in the world when it comes to manufacturing this type of electronic weapon, said Anders Kallenaas of the Swedish National Defense's Research Institute (FOA). Quoting the Swedish newspaper Svenska Dagbladet (1-23-98), the news agency AFP said the high-power microwave bombs (bear cans) could be bought on the Russian market for several hundreds of thousands kronor (< $150,000) and had already been bought by the Australian military among others.

It said the bomb was stored in a briefcase and emitted short, high-energy pulses reaching 10 gigawatts, which could destroy complex electronics systems. As tested, the bomb presents a threat to the Swedish military, in particular to the JAS 39 Gripen jet fighter that it is trying to export. It can also knock out electronic systems of nuclear or electric power plants, banks, trains, or even a simple telephone switchboard. Despite the science-fiction flavor, the electro-magnetic bomb is close to reality. It has been the subject of extensive research in the US and presumably (Sakharov tested his magnetic compression generator 40 years ago + Altshuler, Voitenko and Bichenkov ) Russia for decades. The concept arose through early nuclear testing when scientists realized that high altitude atomic blasts produced an electro-magnetic pulse capable of destroying delicate electronics systems on the ground.Any thermonuclear war would have started with such ionospheric blasts. One consequence was that military computer and electronic systems were hardened to minimize such damage, but civil systems remain vulnerable. Two types of non-nuclear EMP devices have been developed. One uses conventional explosives to induce the EMP; another uses a single-use, high-power microwave generation device.

EMP capabilities were discussed in a paper published by the RAAF Air Power Studies Center in 1996. Its author, defense analyst Carlo Copp, [1] concluded that the design and deployment of electro-magnetic warheads for bombs and missiles was technically feasible in the next decade. Providing that satisfactory solutions can be found for these problems, electro-magnetic munitions for bomb and missile applications promise to be an important and robust weapon in both strategic and tactical operations, offering significantly reduced collateral damage and lower human casualties than established weapons, he said. High Power Electro-magnetic Pulse generation techniques and High Power Microwave technology have matured to the point where practical E-bombs (Electro-magnetic bombs) are becoming technically feasible, with new applications in both Strategic and Tactical Information Warfare. The development of conventional E-bomb devices allows their use in non-nuclear confrontations. This paper discusses aspects of the technology base, weapon delivery techniques and proposes a doctrinal foundation for the use of such devices in warhead and bomb applications.It can be used by special forces teams who infiltrate the enemy's and detonate a device near their electronic devices. It destroys the electronics of all computer and communication systems in a quite large area. The EMP bomb can be smaller than a HERF gun to cause a similar amount of damage and is typically used to damage not a single target (not aiming in one direction) but to damage all equipment near the bomb. [2]

The efficient execution of an Information Warfare campaign against a modern industrial or post-industrial opponent will require the use of specialized tools designed to destroy information systems. High Power Electro-magnetic Pulse generation techniques and High Power Microwave technology have matured to the point where practical electro-magnetic bombs are becoming technically feasible, with new applications in both Strategic and Tactical IW (Information Warfare).

Targets of the E-bombs:

The telecommunication systems
The national power grid
Finance and banking systems
The national transporting systems
The mass media
Because these systems based on electronic systems.

An Radio Frequency Weapon is one that uses intense pulses of RF energy to destroy or degrade the electronics in a target. These weapons can be employed in a narrow beam over a long distance to a point target. They are categorized as High Power Microwave Weapons (HPM) and Ultra Wide Band Weapon (UWB). The phrase non-nuclear electro-magnetic pulse is sometimes used.

Advantages of the HPM:

All weather
Low cost per engagement
Possible to engage multiple targets
Non-lethal to humans
Not able to detect attacks

Electro-magnetic effects

The high temperatures and energetic radiation produced by nuclear explosions also produce large amounts of ionized (electrically charged) matter which is present immediately after the explosion. Under the right conditions, intense currents and electro-magnetic fields can be produced, generically called EMP (Electro-magnetic Pulse), that are felt at long distances. Living organisms are impervious to these effects, but electrical and electronic equipment can be temporarily or permanently disabled by them. Ionized gases can also block short wavelength radio and radar signals (fireball blackout) for extended periods. The occurrence of EMP is strongly dependent on the altitude of burst. It can be significant for surface or low altitude bursts (below 4,000 m); it is very significant for high altitude bursts (above 30,000 m); but it is not significant for altitudes between these extremes. This is because EMP is generated by the asymmetric absorption of instantaneous gamma rays produced by the explosion. At intermediate altitudes the air absorbs these rays fairly uniformly and does not generate long range electro-magnetic disturbances.

The formation EMP begins with the very intense, but very short burst of gamma rays caused by the nuclear reactions in the bomb. About 0.3% of the bomb's energy is in this pulse, but it last for only 10 nanoseconds or so. These gamma rays collide with electrons in air molecules, and eject the electrons at high energies through a process called Compton scattering. These energetic electrons in turn knock other electrons loose, and create a cascade effect that produces some 30,000 electrons for every original gamma ray. In low altitude explosions the electrons, being very light, move much more quickly than the ionized atoms they are removed from and diffuse away from the region where they are formed. This creates a very strong electric field which peaks in intensity to 10 nanoseconds. The gamma rays emitted downward however are absorbed by the ground which prevents charge separation from occurring. This creates a very strong vertical electric current which generates intense electro-magnetic emissions over a wide frequency range (up to 100 MHZ) that emanate mostly horizontally. At the same time, the earth acts as a conductor allowing the electrons to flow back toward the burst point where the positive ions are concentrated. This produces a strong magnetic field along the ground. Although only about 3x10^-10 of the total explosion energy is radiated as EMP in a ground burst (10^6 joules for 1 Mt bomb), it is concentrated in a very short pulse. The charge separation persists for only a few tens of microseconds, making the emission power some 100 gigawatts. The field strengths for ground bursts are high only in the immediate vicinity of the explosion. For smaller bombs they aren't very important because they are strong only where the destruction is intense anyway. With increasing yields, they reach farther from the zone of intense destruction. With a 1 Mt bomb, they remain significant out to the 2 psi overpressure zone (5 miles).

High altitude explosions produce EMPs that dramatically more destructive. About 3x10 ^-5 of the bomb's total energy goes into EMP in this case, 10^11 joules for a 1 Mt bomb. EMP is formed in high altitude explosions when the downwardly directed gamma rays encounter denser layers of air below. A pancake shaped ionization region is formed below the bomb. The zone can extend all the way to the horizon, to 2500 km for an explosion at an altitude of 500 km. The ionization zone is up to 80 km thick at the center. The Earth's magnetic field causes the electrons in this layer to spiral as they travel, creating a powerful downward directed electro-magnetic pulse lasting a few microseconds. A strong vertical electrical field (20-50 KV/m) is also generated between the Earth's surface and the ionized layer, this field lasts for several minutes until the electrons are recaptured by the air. Although the peak EMP field strengths from high altitude bursts are only 1-10% as intense as the peak ground burst fields, they are nearly constant over the entire Earth's surface under the ionized region. The effects of these field on electronics is difficult to predict, but can be profound. Enormous induced electric currents are generated in wires, antennas, and metal objects (like missiles, airplanes, and building frames). Commercial electrical grids are immense EMP antennas and would be subjected to voltage surges far exceeding those created by lightning, and over vastly greater areas. Modern VLSI chips are extremely sensitive to voltage surges, and would be burned out by even small leakage currents. Military equipment is generally designed to be resistant to EMP, but realistic tests are very difficult to perform and EMP protection rests on attention to detail. Minor changes in design, incorrect maintenance procedures, poorly fitting parts, loose debris, moisture, and ordinary dirt can all cause elaborate EMP protections to be totally circumvented. It can be expected that a single high yield, high altitude explosion over an industrialized area would cause massive disruption for an indeterminable period, and would cause huge economic damages (all those damaged chips add up). A separate effect is the ability of the ionized fireball to block radio and radar signals. Like EMP, this effect becomes important with high altitude bursts. Fireball blackout can cause radar to be blocked for tens of seconds to minutes over an area tens of kilometers across. High frequency radio can be disrupted over hundreds to thousands of kilometers for minutes to hours depending on exact conditions.

The technology base for E-bombs

Explosively Pumped Flux Compression Generators (FCG)

The central idea behind the construction of FCGs is that of using a fast explosive to rapidly compress a magnetic field, transferring much energy from the explosive into the magnetic field. The initial magnetic field in the FCG prior to explosive initiation is produced by a start current. The start current is supplied by an external source, such a a high voltage capacitor bank (Marx bank), a smaller FCG or the MHD device. A number of geometrical configurations for FCGs have been published. The most commonly used arrangement is that of the coaxial FCG

The coaxial arrangement is of particular interest in this context, as its essentially cylindrical form factor lends itself to packaging into munitions. In principle, any device capable of producing a pulse of electrical current of the order of tens of kiloAmperes to MegaAmperes will be suitable.

Explosive and Propellant driven MHD Generators

The fundamental principle behind the design of MHD devices is that a conductor moving through a magnetic field will produce an electrical current transverse to the direction of the field and the conductor motion. In an explosive or propellant driven MHD device, the conductor is a plasma of ionized explosive or propellant gas, which travels through the magnetic field. Current is collected by electrodes which are in contact with the plasma jet. The electrical properties of the plasma are optimized by seeding the explosive or propellant with suitable additives, which ionize during the burn.

High Power Microwave Sources (Vircator)

The fundamental idea behind the Vircator is that of accelerating a high current electron beam against a mesh (or foil) anode. Many electrons will pass through the anode, forming a bubble of space charge behind the anode. Under the proper conditions, this space charge region will oscillate at microwave frequencies. If the space charge region is placed into a resonant cavity which is appropriately tuned, very high peak powers may be achieved.

Coupling modes

The major problem area in determining lethality is that of coupling efficiency, which is a measure of how much power is transferred from the field produced by the weapon into the target.Front door coupling occurs typically when power from a electro-magnetic weapon is coupled into an antenna associated with radar or communications equipment. The antenna subsystem is designed to couple power in and out of the equipment.Back Door Coupling occurs when the electro-magnetic field from a weapon produces large transient currents or electrical standing waves (when produced by a HPM weapon) on fixed electrical wiring and cables interconnecting equipment, or providing connections to mains power or the telephone network.A low frequency bomb built around an FCG will require a large antenna to provide good coupling of power from the weapon into the surrounding environment. Whilst weapons built this way are inherently wide band, as most of the power produced lies in the frequency band below 1 MHz compact antennas are not an option.Microwave bombs have a broader range of coupling modes and given the small wavelength in comparison with bomb dimensions, can be readily focussed against targets with a compact antenna assembly.The importance of glide-bombs as delivery means for HPM warheads is threefold. Firstly, the glide-bomb can be released from outside effective radius of target air defenses, therefore minimizing the risk to the launch aircraft. Secondly, the large standoff range means that the aircraft can remain well clear of the bomb's effects. Finally the bomb's autopilot may be programmed to shape the terminal trajectory of the weapon, such that a target may be engaged from the most suitable altitude and aspect.

Targeting Electro-magnetic Bombs
The task of identifying targets for attack with electro-magnetic bombs can be complex. Certain categories of target will be very easy to identify and engage. Buildings housing government offices and thus computer equipment, production facilities, military bases and known radar sites and communications nodes are all targets which can be readily identified through conventional photographic, satellite, imaging radar, electronic reconnaissance and humint operations. These targets are typically geographically fixed and thus may be attacked providing that the aircraft can penetrate to weapon release range. With the accuracy inherent in GPS/inertially guided weapons, the electro-magnetic bomb can be programmed to detonate at the optimal position to inflict a maximum of electrical damage. Mobile and camouflaged targets which radiate overtly can also be readily engaged. Mobile and relocatable air defense equipment, mobile communications nodes and naval vessels are all good examples of this category of target. While radiating, their positions can be precisely tracked with suitable Electronic Support Measures (ESM) and Emitter Locating Systems (ELS) carried either by the launch platform or a remote surveillance platform. In the latter instance target coordinates can be continuously data-linked to the launch platform. As most such targets move relatively slowly, they are unlikely to escape the footprint of the electro-magnetic bomb during the weapon's flight time.

Mobile or hidden targets which do not overtly radiate may present a problem, particularly should conventional means of targeting be employed. A technical solution to this problem does however exist, for many types of target. This solution is the detection and tracking of Unintentional Emission (UE). UE has attracted most attention in the context of TEMPEST surveillance, where transient emanations leaking out from equipment due poor shielding can be detected and in many instances demodulated to recover useful intelligence. Termed Van Eck radiation, such emissions can only be suppressed by rigorous shielding and emission control techniques, such as are employed in TEMPEST rated equipment. Whilst the demodulation of UE can be a technically difficult task to perform well, in the context of targeting electro-magnetic bombs this problem does not arise. To target such an emitter for attack requires only the ability to identify the type of emission and thus target type, and to isolate its position with sufficient accuracy to deliver the bomb. Because the emissions from computer monitors, peripherals, processor equipment, switch-mode power supplies, electrical motors, internal combustion engine ignition systems, variable duty cycle electrical power controllers (thyristor or triac based), super-heterodyne receiver local oscillators and computer networking cables are all distinct in their frequencies and modulations, a suitable Emitter Locating System can be designed to detect, identify and track such sources of emission. A good precedent for this targeting paradigm exists. During the SEA (Vietnam) conflict the United States Air Force (USAF) operated a number of night inter-diction gun-ships which used direction finding receivers to track the emissions from vehicle ignition systems. Once a truck was identified and tracked, the gun-ship would engage it.

Because UE occurs at relatively low power levels, the use of this detection method prior to the outbreak of hostilities can be difficult, as it may be necessary to over-fly hostile territory to find signals of usable intensity. The use of stealthy reconnaissance aircraft or long range, stealthy Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV) may be required. The latter also raises the possibility of autonomous electro-magnetic warhead armed expendable UAVs, fitted with appropriate homing receivers. These would be programmed to loiter in a target area until a suitable emitter is detected, upon which the UAV would home in and expend itself against the target.

Defense against E-bombs

The most effective defense against electro-magnetic bombs is to prevent their delivery by destroying the launch platform or delivery vehicle, as is the case with nuclear weapons. This however may not always be possible, and therefore systems which can be expected to suffer exposure to the electro-magnetic weapons effects must be electro-magnetically hardened. The most effective method is to wholly contain the equipment in an electrically conductive enclosure, termed a Faraday cage, which prevents the electro-magnetic field from gaining access to the protected equipment. However, most such equipment must communicate with and be fed with power from the outside world, and this can provide entry points via which electrical transients may enter the enclosure and effect damage. While optical fibers address this requirement for transferring data in and out, electrical power feeds remain an ongoing vulnerability. Where an electrically conductive channel must enter the enclosure, electro-magnetic arresting devices must be fitted. A range of devices exist, however care must be taken in determining their parameters to ensure that they can deal with the rise time and strength of electrical transients produced by electro-magnetic devices. Reports from the US indicate that hardening measures attuned to the behavior of nuclear EMP bombs do not perform well when dealing with some conventional microwave electro-magnetic device designs.

It is significant that hardening of systems must be carried out at a system level, as electro-magnetic damage to any single element of a complex system could inhibit the function of the whole system. Hardening new build equipment and systems will add a substantial cost burden. Older equipment and systems may be impossible to harden properly and may require complete replacement. In simple terms, hardening by design is significantly easier than attempting to harden existing equipment. Intermittent faults may not be possible to repair economically, thereby causing equipment in this state to be removed from service permanently, with considerable loss in maintenance hours during damage diagnosis. This factor must also be considered when assessing the hardness of equipment against electro-magnetic attack, as partial or incomplete hardening may in this fashion cause more difficulties than it would solve. Indeed, shielding which is incomplete may resonate when excited by radiation and thus contribute to damage inflicted upon the equipment contained within it.Other than hardening against attack, facilities which are concealed should not radiate readily detectable emissions. Where radio frequency communications must be used, low probability of intercept (i.e.. spread spectrum) techniques should be employed exclusively to preclude the use of site emissions for electro-magnetic targeting purposes. Appropriate suppression of UE is also mandatory.

Communications networks for voice, data and services should employ topologies with sufficient redundancy and failover mechanisms to allow operation with multiple nodes and links inoperative. This will deny a user of electro-magnetic bombs the option of disabling large portions if not the whole of the network by taking down one or more key nodes or links with a single or small number of attacks.

Virtual prototyping of RF weapons

Complex and expensive experimental efforts are more timely and cost-effective if they are tested by theoretical and computational modeling. Such computations are made tractable by viewing the device as a system consisting of a pulsed power source, microwave source, and an antenna.Electro-magnetic bombs are Weapons of Electronical Mass Destruction with applications across a broad spectrum of targets, spanning both the strategic and tactical. As such their use offers a very high payoff in attacking the fundamental information processing and communication facilities of a target system. The massed application of these weapons will produce substantial paralysis in any target system, thus providing a decisive advantage in the conduct of Electronic Combat, Offensive Counter Air and Strategic Air Attack.

Because E-bombs can cause hard electrical kills over larger areas than conventional explosive weapons of similar mass, they offer substantial economies in force size for a given level of inflicted damage, and are thus a potent force multiplier for appropriate target sets.

Conclusions
Electro-magnetic bombs are Weapons of Electronical Mass Destruction with applications across a broad spectrum of targets, spanning both the strategic and tactical. As such their use offers a very high payoff in attacking the fundamental information processing and communication facilities of a target system. The massed application of these weapons will produce substantial paralysis in any target system, thus providing a decisive advantage in the conduct of Electronic Combat, Offensive Counter Air and Strategic Air Attack. Because E-bombs can cause hard electrical kills over larger areas than conventional explosive weapons of similar mass, they offer substantial economies in force size for a given level of inflicted damage, and are thus a potent force multiplier for appropriate target sets. The non-lethal nature of electro-magnetic weapons makes their use far less politically damaging than that of conventional munitions, and therefore broadens the range of military options available.

This paper has included a discussion of the technical, operational and targeting aspects of using such weapons, as no historical experience exists as yet upon which to build a doctrinal model. The immaturity of this weapons technology limits the scope of this discussion, and many potential areas of application have intentionally not been discussed. The ongoing technological evolution of this family of weapons will clarify the relationship between weapon size and lethality, thus producing further applications and areas for study. E-bombs can be an affordable force multiplier for military forces which are under post Cold War pressures to reduce force sizes, increasing both their combat potential and political utility in resolving disputes. Given the potentially high payoff deriving from the use of these devices, it is incumbent upon such military forces to appreciate both the offensive and defensive implications of this technology. It is also incumbent upon governments and private industry to consider the implications of the proliferation of this technology, and take measures to safeguard their vital assets from possible future attack. Those who choose not to may become losers in any future wars.

Other Links

Carlo Coop: The Electro-magnetic Bomb : A Weapon of Electronic Mass Destruction http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/ebomb.html
HERF and EMP http://liun.hektik.org/hightech/herf/herf.html
Electro-magnetic Pulse (EMP)&TEMPEST Protection for Facilities http://jya.com/emp.htm
Joint Economic Committee Hearing Radio Frequency Weapons and Proliferation: Potential Impact on the Economy 1998. http://cryptome.org/rfw-jec.htm
EMP shielded rooms and much more www.spyking.com

FOREIGN VIEWS OF ELECTROMAGNETIC PULSE (EMP) ATTACK DR. PETER VINCENT PRY, EMP COMMISSION STAFF BEFORE THE UNITED STATES SENATE SUBCOMMITTEE ON TERRORISM, TECHNOLOGY AND HOMELAND SECURITY March 8, 2005

The EMP Commission sponsored a worldwide survey of foreign scientific and military literature to evaluate the knowledge, and possibly the intentions, of foreign states with respect to electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. The survey found that the physics of EMP phenomenon and the military potential of EMP attack are widely understood in the international community, as reflected in official and unofficial writings and statements. The survey of open sources over the past decade finds that knowledge about EMP and EMP attack is evidenced in at least Britain, France, Germany, Israel, Egypt, Taiwan, Sweden, Cuba, India, Pakistan, Iraq under Saddam Hussein, Iran, North Korea, China and Russia. Numerous foreign governments have invested in hardening programs to provide some protection against nuclear EMP attack, indicating that this threat has broad international credibility. At least some of the new nuclear weapon states, notably India, are concerned that their military command, control, and communications may be vulnerable to EMP attack. For example, an Indian article citing the views of senior officers in the Defense Ministry (including General V. R. Raghavan) concludes: The most complicated, costly, controversial and critically important elements of [nuclear] weaponisation are the C3I systems.... Saving on a C3I system could be suicidal. With a no-first-use policy, the Indian communications systems have to be hardened to withstand the electromagnetic pulses generated by an adversarial nuclear first strike. Otherwise, no one will be fooled by the Indian nuclear deterrent.(C. Rammonohar Reddy, The Hindu, 1 September 1998)

Many foreign analysts perceive nuclear EMP attack as falling within the category of electronic warfare or information warfare, not nuclear warfare. Indeed, the military doctrines of at least China and Russia appear to define information warfare as embracing a spectrum ranging from computer viruses to nuclear EMP attack. For example, consider the following quote from one of China’s most senior military theorists–who is credited by the PRC with inventing information warfare– appearing in his book World War, the Third World War–Total Information Warfare: With their massive destructiveness, longrange nuclear weapons have combined with highly sophisticated information technology and computer technology today and warfare of the looming 21st century: information war under nuclear...Information war and traditional war have one thing in common, namely that the country which possesses the critical weapons such as atomic bombs will have first strike and second strike retaliation capabilities.... As soon as its computer networks come under attack and are destroyed, the country will slip into a state of paralysis and the lives of its people will ground to a halt Therefore, China should focus on measures to counter computer viruses, nuclear electromagnetic pulse... and quickly achieve breakthroughs in those technologies in order to equip China without delay with equivalent deterrence that will enable it to stand up to the military powers in the information age and neutralize and check the deterrence of Western powers, including the United States.(2001)

Some foreign analysts, judging from open source statements and writings, appear to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons, because EMP would inflict no or few prompt civilian casualties. EMP attack appears to be a unique exception to the general stigma attached to nuclear employment by most of the international community in public statements. Significantly, even some analysts in Japan and Germany–nations that historically have been most condemnatory of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction in official and unofficial forums–appear to regard EMP attack as morally defensible. For example, a June 2000 Japanese article in a scholarly journal, citing senior political and military officials, appears to regard EMP attack as a legitimate use of nuclear weapons: Although there is little chance that the Beijing authorities would launch a nuclear attack, which would incur the disapproval of the international community and which would result in such enormous destruction that it would impede postwar cleanup and policies, a serious assault starting with the use of nuclear weapons which would not harm humans, animals, or property, would be valid. If a... nuclear warhead was detonated 40 kilometers above Taiwan, an electromagnetic wave would be propagated which would harm unprotected computers, radar, and IC circuits on the ground within a 100 kilometer radius, and the weapons and equipment which depend on the communications and electronics technology whose superiority Taiwan takes pride in would be rendered combat ineffective at one stroke... If they were detonated in the sky in the vicinity of Ilan, the effects would also extend to the waters near Yonakuni [in Okinawa], so it would be necessary for Japan, too, to take care. Those in Taiwan, having lost their advanced technology capabilities, would end up fighting with tactics and technology going back to the 19th century... They would inevitably be at a disadvantage with the PLA and its overwhelming military force superiority. (Su Tzu-yun, Jadi, 1 June 2000)

An article by a member of India’s Institute of Defense Studies Analysis openly advocates that India be prepared to make a preemptive EMP attack, both for reasons of military necessity and on humanitarian grounds: A study conducted in the U. S. during the late 1980s reported that a high-yield device exploded about 500 kilometers above the ground can generate an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) of the order of 50,000 volts over a radius of 2,500 kilometers around the point of burst which would be collected by any exposed conductor. Such an attack will not cause any blast or thermal effects on the ground below but it can produce a massive breakdown in the communications system.... It is certain that most of the land communication networks and military command control links will be affected and it will undermine our capability to retaliate. This, in fact, is the most powerful incentive for a preemptive attack. And a high-altitude exo-atmospheric explosion may not even kill a bird on the ground.Although India, Pakistan, and Israel are not rogue states, they all presently have missiles and nuclear weapons giving them the capability to make EMP attacks against their regional adversaries. An EMP attack by any of these states–even if targeted at a regional adversary and not the United States–could collaterally damage U. S. forces in the region, and would pose an especially grave threat to U. S. satellites.Many foreign analysts–particularly in Iran, North Korea, China, and Russia–view the United States as a potential aggressor that would be willing to use its entire panoply of weapons, including nuclear weapons, in a first strike. They perceive the United States as having contingency plans to make a nuclear EMP attack, and as being willing to execute those plans under a broad range of circumstances. Russian and Chinese military scientists in open source writings describe the basic principles of nuclear weapons designed specifically to generate an enhanced-EMP effect, that they term Super-EMP weapons. Super-EMP weapons, according to these foreign open source writings, can destroy even the best protected U. S. military and civilian electronic systems.

Chinese military writings are replete with references to the dependency of United States military forces and civilian infrastructure upon sophisticated electronic systems, and to the potential vulnerability of those systems. For example, consider this quote from an official newspaper of the PLA: Some people might think that things similar to the Pearl Harbor Incident are unlikely to take place during the information age. Yet it could be regarded as the Pearl Harbor Incident of the 21st century if a surprise attack is conducted against the enemy’s crucial information systems of command, control, and communications by such means as... electromagnetic pulse weapons.... Even a superpower like the United States, which possesses nuclear missiles and powerful armed forces, cannot guarantee its immunity... In their own words, a highly computerized open society like the United States is extremely vulnerable to electronic attacks from all sides. This is because the U. S. economy, from banks to telephone systems and from power plants to iron and steel works, relies entirely on computer networks.... When a country grows increasingly powerful economically and technologically... it will become increasingly dependent on modern information systems.... The United States is more vulnerable to attacks than any other country in the world. (Zhang Shouqi and Sun Xuegui, Jiefangjun Bao 14 May 1996)

Russian military writings are also replete with references to the dependency of United States military forces and civilian infrastructure upon sophisticated electronic systems, and to the potential vulnerability of those systems. Indeed, Russia made a thinly veiled EMP threat against the United States on May 2,
1999. During the spring of 1999, tensions between the United States and Russia rose sharply over Operation ALLIED FORCE, the NATO bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. A bipartisan delegation from the House Armed Services Committee of the U. S. Congress met in Vienna with their Russian counterparts on the Duma International Affairs Committee, headed by Chairman Vladimir Lukin. The object of the meeting was to reduce U. S. -Russia tensions and seek Russian help in resolving the Balkans crisis. During the meeting, Chairman Lukin and Deputy Chairman Alexander Shaponov chastised the United States for military aggression in the Balkans, and warned that Russia was not helpless to oppose Operation ALLIED FORCE: Hypothetically, if Russia really wanted to hurt the United States in retaliation for NATO’s bombing of Yugoslavia, Russia could fire a submarine launched ballistic missile and detonate a single nuclear warhead at high-altitude over the United States. The resulting electromagnetic pulse would massively disrupt U. S. communications and computer systems, shutting down everything.

(HASC Transcript On Vienna Conference, 2 May 1999)Iran, though not yet a nuclear weapon state, has produced some analysis weighing the use of nuclear weapons to destroy cities, as against Japan in World War II, compared to information warfare that includes electromagnetic pulse... for the destruction of unprotected circuits. An Iranian analyst describes terrorist information warfare as involving not just computer viruses but attacks using electromagnetic pulse (EMP). (Tehran, Siyasat-e Defa-I, 1 March 2001)

An Iranian political-military journal, in an article entitled Electronics To Determine Fate Of Future Wars, suggests that the key to defeating the United States is EMP attack: Advanced information technology equipment exists which has a very high degree of efficiency in warfare. Among these we can refer to communication and information gathering satellites, pilotless planes, and the digital system.... Once you confuse the enemy communication network you can also disrupt the work of the enemy command and decision-making center. Even worse, today when you disable a country’s military high command through disruption of communications you will, in effect, disrupt all the affairs of that country.... 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. (Tehran, Nashriyeh-e Siasi Nezami, December 1998 -January 1999)

Iranian flight-tests of their Shahab-3 medium-range missile, that can reach Israel and U. S. forces in the Persian Gulf, have in recent years involved several explosions at high altitude, reportedly triggered by a self-destruct mechanism on the missile. The Western press has described these flight-tests as failures, because the missiles did not complete their ballistic trajectories. Iran has officially described all of these same tests as successful. The flight-tests would be successful, if Iran were practicing the execution of an EMP attack.Iran, as noted earlier, has also successfully tested firing a missile from a vessel in the Caspian Sea. A nuclear missile concealed in the hold of a freighter would give Iran, or terrorists, the capability to perform an EMP attack against the United States homeland, without developing an ICBM, and with some prospect of remaining anonymous. Iran’s Shahab-3 medium-range missile, mentioned earlier, is a mobile missile, and small enough to be transported in the hold of a freighter. We cannot rule out that Iran, the world’s leading sponsor of international terrorism, might provide terrorists with the means to execute an EMP attack against the United States.

In closing, a few observations about the potential EMP threat from North Korea. North Korean academic writings subscribe to the view voiced in Chinese, Russian, and Iranian writings that computers and advanced communications have inaugurated an information age during which the greatest strength, and greatest vulnerability, of societies will be their electronic infrastructures. According to North Korean press, Chairman Kim Chong-il is himself supposedly an avid proponent of this view. (M. A. Kim Sang-hak, development of Information Industry and Construction of Powerful Socialist State, Pyongyang Kyongje Yongu, 20 May 2002)

The highest ranking official ever to defect from North Korea, Hwang Chang-yop, claimed in 1998 that North Korea has nuclear weapons and explained his defection as an attempt to prevent nuclear war. According to Hwang, in the event of war, North Korea would use nuclear weapons to devastate Japan to prevent the United States from participating. Would it still participate, even after Japan is devastated? That is how they think. Although Hwang did not mention EMP, it is interesting that he described North Korean thinking about nuclear weapons employment as having strategic purposes– nuclear use against Japan–and not tactical purposes–nuclear employment on the battlefield in South Korea. It is also interesting that, according to Hwang, North Korea thinks it can somehow devastate Japan with its tiny nuclear inventory, although how precisely this is to be accomplished with one or two nuclear weapons is unknown.

Perhaps most importantly, note that the alleged purpose of a North Korean nuclear strike on Japan would be to deter the United States. At the time of Hwang’s defection, in 1998, North Korea’s longest-range missile then operational, the No Dong, limited North Korea’s strategic reach to a strike on Japan. Today, North Korea is reportedly on the verge of achieving an ICBM capability with its Taepo Dong-2 missile, estimated to be capable of delivering a nuclear weapon to the United States. In 2004, the EMP Commission met with very senior Russian military officers, who are experts on EMP weapons. They warned that Russian scientists had been recruited by Pyongyang to work on the North Korean nuclear weapons program. They further warned that the knowledge and technology to develop Super-EMP weapons had been transferred to North Korea, and that North Korea could probably develop these weapons in the near future, within a few years. The Russian officers said that the threat to global security that would be posed by a North Korea armed with Super-EMP weapons is unacceptable. The senior Russian military officers, who claimed to be expressing their personal views to the EMP Commission, said that, while the Kremlin could not publicly endorse U. S. preemptive action, Moscow would privately understand the strategic necessity of a preemptive strike by the United States against North Korea’s nuclear complex.

This concludes my statement. Thank you for the opportunity to share this information with the U. S. Senate and the American people.

Link


Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

archives