The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) and the Russian Federation Air Force conducted a cooperative air defense exercise from August 8-11 that focused on combating terrorism.

OVER ALASKA - A pair of F-22 fighters escort Fencing 1220, a Gulfstream 4 simulating a hijacked airliner, over Alaska as part of Exercise VIGILANT EAGLE Aug. 8. VIGILANT EAGLE is a cooperative exercise involving the North American Aerospace Defense Command and the Russian Air Force. The exercise scenario creates a situation that requires both the Russian Air Force and NORAD to launch or divert fighter aircraft to investigate and follow a "hijacked" airliner. The exercise focuses on shadowing and the cooperative hand-off of the monitored aircraft between fighters of the participating nations. (U.S. Army photo by Maj. Mike Humphreys)

Vigilant Eagle was hailed as a milestone exercise between the Cold War era rivals. It included Russian, U.S., along with Canadian Air Force personnel operating from command centers inside Russia and the United States directing fighter jets, as well as civilian air traffic controllers. It took several years to stage the drill which centered around, “an international air terrorism scenario exercised over the Pacific Ocean consisting of forces from the U.S. and Russia responding to the simulated hijacking of a B-757 en route to the Far East.” The joint exercise was, “designed to establish clear communication processes that would allow the two forces to work together during a real crisis.” Russian Air Force Col. Alexander Vasilyev emphasized the importance of cooperation in combating the dangers of air terrorism. He stated, “Terrorism is something that affects all our countries. So it is very important that we work together to develop procedures and bring the relationship between our countries closer together to unite our countries in the fight against terrorism.”

In April, it was announced that, “NATO and Russia have begun a testing phase of a joint system for air traffic coordination. This will be the first NATO-Russia system of this kind to be fielded. The system focuses primarily on the fight against terrorism and will provide a shared radar picture of air traffic and early notification of suspicious air activities.” The report entitled the Moscow Metro Bombings and Terrorism in Russia also addresses the possibility of developing further practical NATO-Russia cooperation in regards to terrorism. President Barack Obama has called for Russia and the U.S. to further deepen collaboration on security and anti-terrorism matters. In May, the Associated Press reported that, “Obama told a Russian television station that no single country can defeat terrorists who have attacked targets throughout the world. He said he looks forward to ‘increasing cooperation between the United States and Russia’ on fighting terrorism.” Despite any past or present tension between the two countries, the seemingly endless shadowy war on terrorism has provided a common enemy and demonstrated how the global conflict can at times make strange bedfellows.

The recent NORAD-Russian air drill was preceded by an incident where Canadian fighter jets repelled two long-range Russian bombers off the coast of Labrador near the Arctic. Russia contends the flight was simply a training mission and deny trying to enter Canadian airspace. They maintain that the Canadian military was aware of the exercise contrary to Defence minister Peter MacKay who insists that they were not notified. NORAD fighters have intercepted between 12 and 18 bombers annually since 2007. In advance of President Obama’s visit to Canada back in February of 2009, Canadian fighter jets were scrambled to head off Russian bombers approaching its airspace. Prime Minster Stephen Harper promised that Canada would defend its airspace and sovereignty by responding every time the Russians make any kind of intrusion into its Arctic territory. At times, Canada and Russia have both been guilty of a war of words in regards to Arctic sovereignty. The latest so-called Russian bomber incursion appears to be nothing more than an attempt by the Conservative government to capitalize on the event to further its political interests.

The Harper government is using the most recent confrontation between Canadian and Russian military planes to justify its plans to buy 65 new jet fighters and draw attention to its stance on Arctic sovereignty. In July, the Canadian government announced plans to acquire the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II which will replace its fleet of CF-18 Hornets. The first F-35’s are expected to be delivered by 2016. Including maintenance of the fighter jets, the total price tag is expected to cost Canadian taxpayers over $16 billion. The government insists they are getting the best aircraft for the best value. Some have questioned the purchase considering Canada is running its largest deficit in history. The Liberal party has been critical of the deal and its lack of transparency. Not to mention that one of Canada’s biggest military acquisitions was done without a single competing bid. The Conservatives argue that they exercised options and that the F-35 was the only next-generation fighter plane that meets the operational requirements of the Canadian Forces. They continue to defend their decision making a case that the new jets are part of its obligation to its allies and will protect Canada’s sovereignty well into the future.

Controversy has surrounded Canadian Defence Department computers being used to alter online Wikipedia entries. This includes the removal of some information which was critical of the Harper government’s decision to spend billions on the new F-35 stealth jet. The New Democrats are demanding answers. NDP MP Claude Gravelle stated, “At worst this type of manipulative behaviour is indicative of the government’s culture of information control.” He went on to say, “Even if this apparent misuse of resources is the work of a lone DND staffer ‘freelancing,’ it raises questions about oversight in that department.” Defence Department computers were also used to insert insults on Wikipedia aimed at the Liberals who have questioned the jet aircraft purchase. Gravelle also added, “Some of the comments posted regarding Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff and the media were particularly worrisome. We do not expect to see this type of big brother behaviour in Canada. Unfortunately Canadians are starting to see a pattern in the desire to control the message.” This illustrates how web based institutions such as Wikipedia can act as gatekeepers and be used to spread propaganda in an effort to guide public perception.

It is expected that the Commons Standing Committee on Defence will hold hearings near the end of August on the Conservative’s proposed purchase of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Liberals remain critical of the plan and have said that if they form the next government, they would put the contract on hold until further review. In the end, they would approve it. The truth is that on most major issues there is hardly a difference between the Liberals and Conservatives and they differ on rhetoric alone. Even the Globe and Mail had a recent headline Tories and Grits are as one on defence policy. Both parties have advanced North American integration through NAFTA, the Security and Prosperity Partnership and other initiatives. They have also supported Canada’s mission in Afghanistan which is slated to end in 2011, but could be extended. In the coming years, Canada could be asked to play a bigger role in the war on terrorism, including participation in future American and NATO military operations. Many would like to see a return to its more traditional role as a peacekeeping nation, one which has garnered praise from the rest of the world.

Whether or not the majority of Canadians support the government’s decision to purchase the new F-35 jets, it does represent a continued commitment to NATO and NORAD. It is also closely tied to deeper U.S.-Canada military integration and a North American security perimeter.
By Dana Gabriel  – Be Your Own Leader
Dana Gabriel is an activist and independent researcher. He writes about trade, globalization, sovereignty, as well as other issues. Contact: beyourownleader@hotmail.com. Visit his blog site at beyourownleader.blogspot.com

One of the biggest prisoner swaps since the cold war unfolded
on the tarmac of Vienna's airport on Friday as two airplanes
-- one carrying 10 accused Russian sleeper agents and the
other with four Russians deemed to be spies for the West --
traded their human cargoes and took off into the bright clear
sky.

An American official confirmed the exchange had taken place,
hours after the 10 accused Russian spies were whisked out of
the United States on a charter plane. The American and
Russian airplanes landed and departed in what appeared to be
a clockwork operation on a remote part of the runway in
Vienna, once a hub of clandestine East-West maneuvering.

The exchange was part of a deal with Moscow to put a quick
end to an episode that threatened to disrupt relations
between the two countries.
Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com?emc=na

Ten people have been arrested for allegedly serving as secret agents of the Russian government with the goal of penetrating U.S. government policymaking circles.

The Justice Department announced the arrests Monday.

According to court papers in the case, the U.S. government intercepted a message from Russian intelligence headquarters in Moscow to two of the defendants. The message states that their main mission is ”to search and develop ties in policymaking circles in US” and send intelligence reports.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP’s earlier story is below.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Ten people have been arrested for allegedly serving as secret agents of the Russian government in the United States, the Justice Department said Monday.

Eight of 10 were arrested Sunday for allegedly carrying out long-term, deep cover assignments in the United States on behalf of Russia.

Two others were arrested for allegedly participating in the same Russian intelligence program within the United States.

Their job, according to the court papers in the case, was ”to search and develop ties in policymaking circles” in the United States.

Each of the 10 was charged with conspiracy to act as an agent of a foreign government, which carries a maximum penalty of five years in prison on conviction.

The cases were filed in U.S. District Court for the southern district of New York.

Federal law prohibits individuals from acting as agents of foreign governments within the United States without notifying the U.S. attorney general.

Nine of the defendants were charged with conspiracy to commit money laundering, which carries a maximum 20 years in prison on conviction.

FBI agents arrested the defendants known as Richard Murphy and Cynthia Murphy at their residence in Montclair, N.J., and they were appearing Monday in federal court in Manhattan.

Three other defendants also were being taken to federal court in Manhattan — Vicky Pelaez and a defendant known as ”Juan Lazaro,” who were arrested at their residence in Yonkers, N.Y., and Anna Chapman, who was arrested in Manhattan on Sunday.

Two other defendants known as Michael Zottoli and Patricia Mills were arrested at their residence in Arlington, Va., and were appearing in federal court in Alexandria, Va., on Monday.

Also being taken to federal court in Alexandria was Mikhail Semenko, who was arrested Sunday at his residence in Arlington.

Two defendants known as Donald Howard Heathfield and Tracey Lee Ann Foley were arrested at their residence in Boston on Sunday and were appearing in federal court in Boston on Monday.

The Justice Department said that a defendant known as Christopher R. Metsos was not in custody.

The arrests were the result of a multiyear FBI investigation into an alleged network of U.S.-based agents who concealed all connections between themselves and Russia.

The U.S. government intercepted a message from Russian intelligence headquarters in Moscow to two of the defendants, Richard and Cynthia Murphy.

”You were sent to USA for long-term service trip,” the message from Moscow. ”Your education, bank accounts, car, house etc. — all these serve one goal: fulfill your main mission, i.e. to search and develop ties in policymaking circles in US and sent intels,” the message added.

NATO is considering the use of military force against enemies who launch cyber attacks on its member states.

The move follows a series of Russian-linked hacking against Nato members and warnings from intelligence services of the growing threat from China.

A team of Nato experts led by Madeleine Albright, the former US secretary of state, has warned that the next attack on a Nato country “may well come down a fibre-optic cable”.

A report by Albright’s group said that a cyber attack on the critical infrastructure of a Nato country could equate to an armed attack, justifying retaliation.

“A large-scale attack on Nato’s command and control systems or energy grids could possibly lead to collective defence measures under article 5,” the experts said.

Article 5 is the cornerstone of the 1949 Nato charter, laying down that “an armed attack” against one or more Nato countries “shall be considered an attack against them all”.

It was the clause in the charter that was invoked following the September 11 attacks to justify the removal of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

Nato is now considering how severe the attack would have to be to justify retaliation, what military force could be used and what targets would be attacked.

The organisation’s lawyers say that because the effect of a cyber attack can be similar to an armed assault, there is no need to redraft existing treaties.

Eneken Tikk, a lawyer at Nato’s cyber defence centre in Estonia, said it would be enough to invoke the mutual defence clause “if, for example, a cyber attack on a country’s power networks or critical infrastructure resulted in casualties and destruction comparable to a military attack”.

Nato heads of government are expected to discuss the potential use of military force in response to cyber attacks at a summit in Lisbon in November that will debate the alliance’s future. General Keith Alexander, head of the newly created US cyber command, said last week there was a need for “clear rules of engagement that say what we can stop”.

The concerns follow warnings from intelligence services across Europe that computer-launched attacks from Russia and China are a mounting threat. Russian hackers have been blamed for an attack against Estonia in April and May of 2007 which crippled government, media and banking communications and internet sites.

They also attacked Georgian computer systems during the August 2008 invasion of the country, bringing down air defence networks and telecommunications systems belonging to the president, the government and banks.

Alexander disclosed last week that a 2008 attack on the Pentagon’s systems, believed to have been mounted by the Chinese, successfully broke through into classified areas.

Britain’s Joint Intelligence Committee cautioned last year that Chinese-made parts in the BT phone network could be used to bring down systems running the country’s power and food supplies.

Some experts have warned that it is often hard to establish government involvement. Many Russian attacks, for example, have been blamed on the Russian mafia. The Kremlin has consistently refused to sign an international treaty banning internet crime.